Utopia | Sir Thomas More

Sir Thomas More's "Utopia" was first published in Latin in 1515. The piece was not translated to English until 1551, and I had the fortunate (or unfortunate - depending on how you look at it) privilege of reading this first English edition. The language is rather old, which makes it a slower read, but the novel itself is only about 140 pages. It's split into two books and has a brief introduction written by the translator to one of the secretaries to the King of England.

What's quite interesting about this note, is that the translator (Ralph Robinson) states that he doesn't believe in More's view of Christianity, but insists that this work was so important that it needed to be translated into English. However, Robinson also goes on to say that he was going to give up the task of translating this text, if not for a friend of his who convinced him to continue. He states that it was for this reason alone that he continued, and if the King did not approve of the translation, he takes no responsibility for the work. What a coward - the true antithesis of what Sir Thomas More stood for.

Note that Sir Thomas More was eventually executed by order of the King of England (Henry VIII) in 1535, for not signing the "Act of Supremacy" which would have declared King Henry VIII the Supreme Head of the Church of England. With this title, the King would have been able to annul the marriage to his wife Catherine, whom he was upset with for not producing an heir to the throne. There was a great movie done on the situation entitled "A Man For All Seasons", which was produced in 1966. Sir Thomas More was played by Paul Scofield - and Orson Welles played the part of a Cardinal.

The book is written as a dialogue between More himself and Raphel Hythloday, a scholar that he is introduced to by his friend Peter Giles. The first book deals with the current state of England and touches on subjects such as theft, greed, class, materialism, chain gangs, religion and vanity. More exposes the flaws he witnesses in society, with the ultimate goal to challenge the beliefs of the men in charge of governance.

Here are some of my favourite quotes from Book One:

"...the most part of all princes have more delight in warlike matters and feats of chivalry (the knowledge whereof I neither have no desire) than in the good feats of peace, and employ much more study how by right or by wrong to enlarge their dominions, than how well and peaceable to rule and govern that they have already." 22

"For it is too extreme and cruel a punishment for theft, and yet not sufficient to refrain and withhold men from theft. For simple theft is not so great an offence that it ought to be punished with death. Neither there is any punishment so horrible that it can keep them from stealing which have no other craft whereby to get their living. Therefore in this point not you only but also the most part of the world be like evil schoolmasters, which be readier to beat than to teach their scholars. For great and horrible punishments be appointed for thieves, whereas much rather provision should have been made that there were some means whereby they might get their living, so that no man should be driven to this extreme necessity, first to steal and then to die." 24-25

"...the king ought to take more care for the wealth of his people than for his own wealth, even as the office and duty of a shepherd is, in that he is a shepherd, to feed his sheep rather than himself." 46-47

"...it is against the dignity of a king to have rule over beggars, but rather over rich and wealthy men. Of this mind was the hardy and courageous Fabricius when he said that he had rather be a ruler of rich men than be rich himself. And, verily, one man to live in pleasure and wealth while all others weep and smart for it, that is the part, not of a king, but of a jailer." 47

In book two, More outlines what Utopia (formerly called "Abraxa") is. He teaches us about the Utopia way of life and touches on many subjects including vanity, hunting, good vs. evil, right vs. wrong, moral vs. immoral, prisoners, illness, euthanasia, divorce, fidelity/marriage, homosexuality, revenge, mercenaries, sacrifice and religion. It's clearly evident that More is opening a full can of worms to make a point to the 'learned' rulers of society. He challenges their ideals and paints a picture that sounds a lot like communism - years before his time.

The novel in parts, is tremendously dated. His views on homosexuality, for example, are clearly the views popular in those times (which are not in fashion today) - but most of his views go against the grain. I particular enjoy his view on gold and how the Utopians give it to their children to play with because it has no real value. The only value the metal has is an artificial one, and something that we still believe in today. Gold is 'valued' at over $900 per ounce, and provides very little functionality. More challenges our views on such subjects and teaches us about our shallow way of living.

Here are some of my favourite quotes from Book Two:

..."take heed that no man sit idle, but that every one apply his own craft with earnest diligence; and yet for all that, not to be wearied from early in the morning to late in the evening with continual work, like labouring and toiling beasts." 66

"...to withdraw something from thyself to give to others, that is a point of humanity and gentleness, which never taketh away so much commodity as it bringeth again. For it is recompensed with the return of benefits; and the conscience of the good deed, with the remembrance of the thankful love and benevolence of them to whom thou hast done it, doth bring more pleasure to thy mind than that which thou hast withholden from thyself could have brought to thy body." 88-89

On law...
"...every man should plead his own matter, and tell the same tale before the judge that he would tell to his man of law. So shall there be less circumstance of words, and the truth shall sooner come to light, whiles the judge with a discreet judgment doth weigh the words of him whom no lawyer hath instruct with deceit, and whiles he helpeth and beareth out simple wits against the false and malicious circumventions of crafty children." 106

"...no man shall be blamed for reasoning in the maintenance of his own religion." 121

"For what can be more rich than to live joyfully and merrily, without all grief and pensiveness, not caring for his own living, nor vexed or troubled with his wife's importunate complaints, nor dreading poverty to his son, nor sorrowing for his daughter's dowry?" 133

"I can perceive nothing but a certain conspiracy of rich men procuring their own commodities under the name and title of the commonwealth." 135

On Pride...
"She measureth not wealth and prosperity by her own commodities, but by the misery and incommodities of other." 136

At the end of the novel, More sticks in the last dagger as a challenge - that he wishes for some of these concepts to stick in current English society, but he's smart enough not to hope for something he doesn't think will ever happen.

In conclusion, this book was a very interesting read, especially if you understand some of the history behind More and his feelings towards integrity, honour and doing the 'right' things in life. The book clearly had an effect on society, and still does challenge the thinking of people, even in the present day. It was not only bold and instrumental during the 1500's, but it's bold now - and shows us how little progression we have made, in a society that claims to be focused on 'growth'. It's too bad no one ever took the time to think about the word.

Wuthering Heights | Emily Bronte

Wuthering Heights was the successfully ambitious first and only novel by Emily Bronte. It’s a shame that a bout of consumption ended her life prematurely at the age of 30, because this novel was quite a refreshing change of pace – especially for a Victorian period used to its sickly sweet love stories. “Wuthering Heights” strayed far from the formulaic concept of love, and was shunned by society of the time. Only after Bronte’s death was the novel finally embraced by society.

The story is about Heathcliff, a homeless boy who was taken in by Mr. Earnshaw on a long road trip, and adopted as his son. When Mr. Earnshaw dies, he is verbally and physically abused by Earnshaw’s brother and Heathcliff’s new master, Hindley. During this time (Heathcliff’s teenage years) he finds comfort and happiness with Mr. Earnshaw’s daughter, Catherine, who he falls in love with. The feeling is mutual, but when Heathcliff overhears the wrong part of a conversation between Ellen (the family servant) and Catherine, he believes Catherine has never loved him. Catherine eventually makes the decision to marry a wealthy man who she cares for but doesn’t love, named Edgar Linton. Heathcliff leaves Wuthering Heights and only comes back years later with nothing but unbridled revenge on his mind. Heathcliff destroys everyone around him – if he cannot be happy, then no one should have that privilege.

The revenge and hatred spans decades, and we are made familiar with the events mostly through the eyes of Ellen (Nelly) Dean, the family servant who explains the story to Mr. Lockwood, a tenant who is astounded by the coldness exhibited in Wuthering Heights years after Catherine’s death. This third party perspective has a refreshing impact on the story, but Bronte makes the mistake of switching perspectives to other characters at times, without proper transitions. This often leaves the reader leafing backwards through the novel to try to figure out where the narrator changed.

What has caused this novel to be so acclaimed over time, is the genuineness of its characters. Each one can be loved and hated at times, and it leaves the reader to make their own interpretation of the goodness of each character and if the character is ultimately responsible for his or her own attitudes. I think the feelings towards these characters vary depending on who reads the novel. Some portray Heathcliff to be the ultimate man, with a love unequalled over time. Proponents of this point of view often sight Bronte’s work as “the Greatest Love Story of All-Time.” Others view Heathcliff as a selfish fool, unable to see the hypocrisy of treating others in the same ill manner in which he was treated as an adolescent. In a way, Heathcliff never really grows up.

I’ve had to take quite some time to digest this novel, to come to a conclusion of the message. I think what makes “Wuthering Heights” a great novel is based on the effect it has on readers. Depending on which message you gain from the novel, it says something about your personal character and your belief towards the concept of love. I believe that each reader has the tendency to project their own feelings on Heathcliff and his intentions to ultimately determine if he was an evil man or just a product of love’s potential destructive nature. The fact that people still contemplate this very concept over 150 years later is astounding.

Here are my personal thoughts on the novel, which should reveal a little about myself in the process. I believe that love, like many emotions such as anger and rage, have the ability to blind an individual depending on their make-up and prior experiences. Each individual has a choice on which path they want to follow: the path of destruction or the path of acceptance. Heathcliff chooses the path of destruction. He may be predisposed to this path due to his upbringing, but there are still many people who are able to overcome their upbringings to become ‘productive’ members of society.

I don’t believe or disbelieve that Heathcliff’s actions are his fault, but simply acknowledge that he created these actions and has to live with the consequences. It is unfortunate that these actions have consequences on others, but this is life. As a member of society, you have the ability to affect others by your actions for either better or worse. You ultimately have to choose, and Heathcliff chooses to be destructive. ‘Love’ affected him negatively, but love has the ability to work either way. I think this book cautions us to see the duality of love and shows us the consequence of the choice to be destructive.

A good message from a compelling novel.

Gulliver's Travels | Jonathan Swift

“Gulliver’s Travels” was first published in 1726, and is still valid 283 years later. The satirical novel chronicles the life of Lemuel Gulliver, a surgeon with a love of adventure and the sea. In his travels, Gulliver visits four unknown societies and learns their languages and their culture, at the same time detailing the culture of his native England. Inhabitants of these societies have values quite different from standard humans, and they don’t understand why we do some of the things we do. What we receive from Swift is a commentary on our way of life, questioning the fabric of our society.

Gulliver’s first adventure lands him in Lilliput, a land of people of a far less stature than Gulliver himself. Most of the Lilliputans are around six inches tall and are in a constant warring with another adjacent kingdom over the methodology in which they eat their eggs. It’s a great slight on religion, and some of the trivial things that religions fight over. How many people over the 283 years since Swift has written this novel, have died over a trivial point in a religious sect?

After a brief time at home with his family, Gulliver finds himself compelled again to the sea where he washes ashore amongst men which look like giants to him. The experience is the exact opposite in the native land of Brobdingnag than it was is Lilliput! He is caught by a giant and is given to his daughter as a pet. After Gulliver begins to learn the native language and shows off his swordsmanship skills to the family, the giant decides to take Gulliver on a circuit, showing him off like a circus freak to towns all over the nation. The constant exploitation tires Gulliver and renders him useless – he is the worn down shell of a man. Gulliver is sold into royalty, where he has many conversations with the king about English society and how it is run. It’s at this point that the commentary on some of the more absurd aspects of life are discussed, mainly regarding politics and the legal system. There was also quite a commentary on beauty and how when looking upon someone of gigantic size, blemishes and flaws are easier to note. Everyone has ‘flaws’ in their appearance, but that says nothing of their character.

After another brief stint in England, Gulliver travels to Laputa, a land founded on mathematics and astronomy. Gulliver is taken to a floating island, where movement is controlled by the master astronomers. In addition, he meets some magicians who have the ability to call upon the dead in order to serve them and promptly calls some prominent figures in history (ex: Alexander the Great) to discuss their life. It is here that Swift teaches us that history as we know it is not always a function of truth; lies are passed down through the ages and an accurate account of the lives of our heroes do not exist. In fact, the people that we look up to may not be heroes at all, for stories of heroes are rarely accurately recorded.

Shortly after this experience, Gulliver is taken to the mainland where he discovers nearly complete ruin. This society is obsessed with perfection, and is undergoing a tremendous amount of useless experiments in order to come up with perfect systems. As a result, they live in poverty and filth and are not progressing as a society.

The last trip on the docket is to see the Houyhnhnms, a type of horse with extensive communication skills and a natural instinct towards sustainable living. They lived in conjunction with the Yahoos, which had nearly all the same features as humans and were regarded as nuisances who could not help but use up resources at a quick pace and exhibited no control or higher rational thought. After years of living with the Houyhnhnms and discussing their philosophies, Gulliver falls in love with their values and way of life and makes a resolution to stay. Circumstances do not allow this, and he is sent back to England where he is disgusted by society including his own family. Gulliver spends numerous hours with his horses which he believes he has some mutual understanding with.

Swift makes a continual note that this book is an effort, not to entertain us, but to tell us the truth. He is imploring us to challenge our histories, our way of thinking to discover the truth that exists in society. He’s trying to get us to break down the walls, destroy the machine and ultimately change the thinking of the world. This book was written to create a movement, starting with each person that reads it.

Now that I’ve discussed the heart of the novel, I wanted to talk a little bit on how it was structured. It took me a while to determine why the novel had so little commentary on society in Lilliput to eventually a complete explosion of commentary in the land of the Houyhnhnms. My theory is, that as one ages in life, the things he/she finds important change. Children are most concerned with toys, teens are most concerned with fitting in and as one converts to a young adult, he/she becomes more concerned with the state of society and the world. This book symbolizes a progression of mindset to me. Gulliver was once more concerned about operational issues relating to size differences and eventually he becomes more concerned with the functioning of his own society. His values have shifted and this novel displays that growth.

“Gulliver’s Travels” is tremendously satirical. There are a few aspects that don’t necessarily fit well within today’s multicultural and equal rights society. There was a comment made about a native language being much easier to understand than Chinese as well as numerous comments made about the female sex. Chalk it up to a sign of the times, but note that these discretions exist and add very little to the commentary.

The style in the novel I found very difficult at first. Nearly all the sentences are run-on and the point sometimes becomes muddled in the mind at the end of such a diatribe. I had to re-read quite a few sentences because I forgot where the point started from and it was necessary to see where Swift was going. All in all, for a book written nearly 300 years ago, the reading was not as difficult as I anticipated.

In summary, I enjoyed this book much more after a great book club discussion. This novel requires some time to stew and digest, but afterwards you are left with profound impact. The one thing about fiction, is that it is usually published as intended and held in stone (ignoring translations, posthumous works etc) and Swift’s work will be forever immortalized as a form of truth.

Ender in Exile | Orson Scott Card

Excluding "War of Gifts" and "First Meetings", this is really the ninth book in the Ender's Game series. This wraps up the entire series by solving some of the questions that we were plagued with at the end of both series', which include: "Where did Ender find the Hive Queen?" and "What happened to Bean's final embryo?" This book was written to detail what happened to Ender Wiggin, after he destroyed the "buggers" and saving the human race. This story details his adventures in exile.

The tale starts out on the colony ship, which is delivering Ender to "Shakespeare Colony" AKA "Colony I" where he is to become governor. However, the captain Quincy Morgan has other ideas. The captain has become hungry with power, and expects to lead the colony when the ship lands. He also has complete authority and power over Ender's future while on the ship, able to put Wiggin into stasis for the duration of the trip, a state of inactivity caused by opposing equal forces. While in space, time elapses more quickly than on earth, and Ender cannot waste any time in stasis when he needs to focus on getting to know his future colonists and dealing with world politics. After the ship lands and the citizens make it to Shakespeare colony, the rest of the book details the finding of the Hive Queen in addition to traveling to Ganges where the mystery of Bean's embryo is discovered.

I found this novel very dualistic, contrary to nearly all other Card novels. It seemed as though Card was distracted with all the details in the first half of the novel. It was evident that he was trying to make all the pieces fit without contradicting himself, and I think he neglected to focus enough on the story and instead plugged it with such things as a play within the novel on "The Taming of the Shrew," with his own characters playing lead roles. After the arrival at Shakespeare colony, it seemed like Card relaxed a little bit on the details and let the story flow a little more. At this point, the story told itself and couldn't help but get wrapped back up into the Ender universe.

The story is really about how a war veteran deals with the psychological aspects of post-war life. Ender was consumed with guilt for destroying the Bugger race, and he spent most of his time on the ship going through material on their lives. He was obsessed with the question "Why did they let me kill them?" The continued development of Ender Wiggin, not only in actions, but in thought processes is reason enough to read this novel. This novel became a pleasure because of it, and redeemed some of the poorer aspects of the story as a result.

Card repeatedly uses some offbeat humour that comes across as childish, in the novel. I understand his playfulness, but at times, it was uncalled for and not inkeeping with the story. At one point, Ender signed his name "Ended" in a note which was written "in case he died." It was a horrible attempt at humour, and was one of a handful of poorly placed quips. In addition, by the end of the novel I was really getting sick of Card's use of naming places, people and things. In addition to "Shakespeare Colony" and the character "Achilles", which were coined first in another book, he named an Italian family Toscanos - obviously a play on the Italian city of Tuscany. In addition, the town that this family came from was called "Monopoli." Is it just me, or does that come across as a playful but stupid?

In summary, this was ranked just better than "Shadow of the Hegemon" and "Xenocide" but worse than the other novels. While half of the story was boring and tedious, the story picked up after landing at Shakespeare Colony and the growing of Ender's intelligence. Some interesting insights into people and war rounded out the novel nicely and made it a good, if not impressive, read. Three stars.


QUOTATIONS:

"I didn't have the skill to hurt them enough to prevent future attacks, and yet not kill them." 33

"People don't change, Val. Not their fundamental character. Whatever you're going to be as an adult is already visible to someone who really knows you from your birth onward." 60

"A smart boy isn't looking for a girl who is even smarter, he's looking for a girl who will love him." 91

"We aren't here to preserve the local ecology like a museum. We're here to colonize, to suit the world for ourselves." 199

In regards to monetary coins:
"You always give the greatest man the smallest denomination." 307

A Farewell to Arms | Ernest Hemingway

After finishing Hemingway's short-stories last month, I was excited to get back to another one of his novels, and I must say that I was slightly disappointed in relation to his other works (but still pleased with the work as a whole). "A Farewell to Arms" was still a wonderful novel that I was happy to read, but it definitely fell short of "The Old Man and the Sea," "For Whom the Bell Tolls" as well as some of his short stories such as "The Snows of Kilamanjaro." It's almost a shame these other novels were so good, because it makes the comparison to this novel unfair.

The story chronicled the life of Frederic Henry, an American ambulance driver in the Italian army in World War I. He meets Catherine Barkley, a nurse, who is on the verge of losing her mind after losing her husband in the war. Henry is on the prowl, just looking to be with someone to take his mind away from the war. However, as he gets to know Barkley more, he discovers that he truly loves her.

Some critisize the love between Henry and Barkley as a hollow love. From reading a majority of Hemingway's novels, you can tell that he loves the simplicity in relationships and that he believes complications only tarnish love. His dialogue between these two characters show this - the simplicity seems to be a romance not only in Henry's mind, but Hemingway's as well.

Some argue that dialogue between Henry and other characters in the novel seem simplistic. I find the simplicity remarkably beautiful; and whether or not people generally speak this way, I have no doubt that at least a few still do. This beautiful simplicity is not something that is easy to accomplish either in writing or in reality, especially in today's society. If you look closer, there is tremendous depth behind the simplistic dialogue. If you are not captivated with the emotions in this story, you could miss the incredible amount of information hidden between the lines of text.

The war, in and of itself, is described in stark contrast to Tolstoyan novel. The war is not epic - it's the small things in war that Hemingway describes that makes the tale both beautiful and remarkable. The feeling of being hit with a mortar shell, the self-deprecation involved in doing anything to get away from the line, and the feeling of being caught between the Germans and the Italians as you moved your way cautiously over the terrain.

In "A Farewell to Arms," Hemingway ultimately shows how the human mind bends and will eventually break. After the war ends for Henry, he travels with a pregnant Barkley through Switzerland. Hemingway had me waiting for the inevitable drop of the preverbial hammer... but I must admit, I was duped as to the ending. Of course, Hemingway did not disappoint, and you could not help but feel like Henry was right: "...they killed you in the end. You could count on that. Stay around and they would kill you." A sad end, so true, in the face of war.

------------
FAVOURITE QUOTATIONS:
"There were many words that you could not stand to hear and finally only the names of places had dignity. Certain numbers were the same way and certain dates and these with the names of the places were all you could say and have them mean anything. Abstract words such as glory, honor, courage, or hallow were obscene beside the concrete names of villages, the numbers of roads, the names of rivers, the numbers of regiments and the dates." 172-173

"Often a man wishes to be alone and a girl wishes to be alone too and if they love each other they are jealous of that in each other, but I can truly say we never felt that. We could feel alone when we were toeghter, alone against the others." 234

Earth Hour Update

Last night, despite being in the mood to stay home and veg, we turned off all the electricity (including the fridge) and went out for our customary walk around the neighbourhood. I must say that I am very upset at most of the businesses in our area this year. It seems like last year was a fad to them and most couldn't give two shits about it this time around. Of course, there were some loyal partakers... I've tried to ingrain them into the back of my mind.

Anyhow, our community once again started a procession this year... which ended up at a church. We had no idea, but decided to tag along anyway... and boy, were we glad we did. It ended with organic hot chocolate, organic chocolates and cider. It also had a bunch of goodies that I can't really describe... but great ethnic food as well. Since I hadn't eaten yet, I was glad to fill my empty stomach.

There were a bunch of booths and tables and I read and signed some petitions. However, I was a little upset at the fact that the people at the booths didn't seem to care much about being there and I didn't have one person talk to me or make a pitch. That was very disheartening.

I was upset that the event seemed so political. We received a bag with our MP's name on it and listened to her speech. Don't get me wrong, I'm grateful for the event... but this in addition to a miserly $100 donation from a local business, was pretty disheartening. In addition, we recycled most of the paper cups and plates... but I would have been happy with more real cups and plates. I would have even helped out with the dishes.

All in all, a good start. You can't fault the community for it's intentions... but hopefully the event will be a lot greener and enthusiastic next year. We need to emotionally move people, so they can become champions of the movement as well.

Earth Hour | March 28th 8:30pm

This will be the second year we will participate in Earth Hour, a time where we will shut-off everything we possibly can (including the fridge) to conserve energy. Last year, we went for a long walk on our local street, and there were many others walking in a large procession. We live in a semi-hippy area, so I believe that this event is larger here. Most stores along the strip also do their part, but it's amazing to see customer's anger at stores who do not follow-suit. It's good to put that kind of pressure on everyone, within a close-knit community.

It's sad that a lot of this is event's momentum is lost in the corporate aspects, including sponsorship, but I am determined to focus on the positives. It's a nice night to meet people in your community and it gets people talking about energy conservation... for at least a few weeks afterwards. I'm not exactly sure why this year's time has been changed to 8:30pm (from 8pm last year). One of the greatest things about last year were the number of families out in the procession. If children are our future, it's good to bring them up in an earth-friendly way... and this is a good step. If the time is pushed back to too late, a lot of these younger children won't be able to stay up for it and/or parents will have to stay at home. I would think that it was a political decision and that the City of Toronto sets the time.

I haven't seen this much buzz about Earth Hour this year, in comparison to last. I have seen a few ads in National Geographic, which makes me smile that it's gotten to a large cross-section of people that care for the environment. It appears that 77 countries have signed up so far. I'm kind of upset that countries like Iceland and Japan have not signed up. Africa's participation looks weak with the only participation in the more well-off coutries such as South Africa and Kenya. I would assume that it has something to do with the amount of power distributed throughout the continent, which I assume would not be much.

Anyway, I'm excited for it... and we've been doing our part to reduce our footprint at home. We try to use less light when possible (including more fluorescent lamps) and I'm trying my best to shut the computer off when I go to bed, and sometimes when I'm not using it. I must admit that it's hard to get into the habit. We're also trying not to use too much heat or a/c. I'm very good with the heat conservation, but I am definitely used to my a/c... and I don't like to listen to the noise from the road when I open the window. Small steps count.

As a sidenote, the article in March 2009's National Geographic about reducing your carbon footprint, is a good one. Strongly recommended.

Greatest 100 Novels of All-time

There are a LOT of "greatest" lists out there, but it seems that the most renown are either from Times Magazine or from the Modern Library. Since Times' list is from 1923 onwards, I'm going to use Modern Library's list as the ultimate. Please post a comment if you have another list which you think is better.

I'm not sure if I'm ever going to get through all of these, but I wanted to take some time and figure out how far I have already got. Since I've started a classics book club, I figured I would have been able to polish a few of these off of the list. Let's see how far I've gotten. Books bolded are ones that I have read completely.

ULYSSES by James Joyce
THE GREAT GATSBY by F. Scott Fitzgerald
A PORTRAIT OF THE ARTIST AS A YOUNG MAN by James Joyce
LOLITA by Vladimir Nabokov
BRAVE NEW WORLD by Aldous Huxley
THE SOUND AND THE FURY by William Faulkner
CATCH-22
DARKNESS AT NOON by Arthur Koestler
SONS AND LOVERS by D.H. Lawrence
THE GRAPES OF WRATH by John Steinbeck
UNDER THE VOLCANO by Malcolm Lowry
THE WAY OF ALL FLESH by Samuel Butler
1984 by George Orwell
I, CLAUDIUS by Robert Graves
TO THE LIGHTHOUSE by Virginia Woolf
AN AMERICAN TRAGEDY by Theodore Dreiser
THE HEART IS A LONELY HUNTER by Carson McCullers
SLAUGHTERHOUSE-FIVE by Kurt Vonnegut
INVISIBLE MAN by Ralph Ellison
NATIVE SON by Richard Wright
HENDERSON THE RAIN KING by Saul Bellow
APPOINTMENT IN SAMARRA by John O'Hara
U.S.A. (trilogy) by John Dos Passos
WINESBURG, OHIO by Sherwood Anderson
A PASSAGE TO INDIA by E.M. Forster
THE WINGS OF THE DOVE by Henry James
THE AMBASSADORS by Henry James
TENDER IS THE NIGHT by F. Scott Fitzgerald
THE STUDS LONIGAN TRILOGY by James T. Farrell
THE GOOD SOLDIER by Ford Madox Ford
ANIMAL FARM by George Orwell
THE GOLDEN BOWL by Henry James
SISTER CARRIE by Theodore Dreiser
A HANDFUL OF DUST by Evelyn Waugh
AS I LAY DYING by William Faulkner
ALL THE KING'S MEN by Robert Penn Warren
THE BRIDGE OF SAN LUIS REY by Thornton Wilder
HOWARDS END by E.M. Forster
GO TELL IT ON THE MOUNTAIN by James Baldwin
THE HEART OF THE MATTER by Graham Greene
LORD OF THE FLIES by William Golding
DELIVERANCE by James Dickey
A DANCE TO THE MUSIC OF TIME (series) by Anthony Powell
POINT COUNTER POINT by Aldous Huxley
THE SUN ALSO RISES by Ernest Hemingway
THE SECRET AGENT by Joseph Conrad
NOSTROMO by Joseph Conrad
THE RAINBOW by D.H. Lawrence
WOMEN IN LOVE by D.H. Lawrence
TROPIC OF CANCER by Henry Miller
THE NAKED AND THE DEAD by Norman Mailer
PORTNOY'S COMPLAINT by Philip Roth
PALE FIRE by Vladimir Nabokov
LIGHT IN AUGUST by William Faulkner
ON THE ROAD by Jack Kerouac
THE MALTESE FALCON by Dashiell Hammett
PARADE'S END by Ford Madox Ford
THE AGE OF INNOCENCE by Edith Wharton
ZULEIKA DOBSON by Max Beerbohm
THE MOVIEGOER by Walker Percy
DEATH COMES FOR THE ARCHBISHOP by Willa Cather
FROM HERE TO ETERNITY by James Jones
THE WAPSHOT CHRONICLES by John Cheever
THE CATCHER IN THE RYE by J.D. Salinger
A CLOCKWORK ORANGE by Anthony Burgess
OF HUMAN BONDAGE by W. Somerset Maugham
HEART OF DARKNESS by Joseph Conrad
MAIN STREET by Sinclair Lewis
THE HOUSE OF MIRTH by Edith Wharton
THE ALEXANDRIA QUARTET by Lawrence Durell
A HIGH WIND IN JAMAICA by Richard Hughes
A HOUSE FOR MR BISWAS by V.S. Naipaul
THE DAY OF THE LOCUST by Nathanael West
A FAREWELL TO ARMS by Ernest Hemingway (reading in March)
SCOOP by Evelyn Waugh
THE PRIME OF MISS JEAN BRODIE by Muriel Spark
FINNEGANS WAKE by James Joyce
KIM by Rudyard Kipling
A ROOM WITH A VIEW by E.M. Forster
BRIDESHEAD REVISITED by Evelyn Waugh
THE ADVENTURES OF AUGIE MARCH by Saul Bellow
ANGLE OF REPOSE by Wallace Stegner
A BEND IN THE RIVER by V.S. Naipaul
THE DEATH OF THE HEART by Elizabeth Bowen
LORD JIM by Joseph Conrad
RAGTIME by E.L. Doctorow
THE OLD WIVES' TALE by Arnold Bennett
THE CALL OF THE WILD by Jack London
LOVING by Henry Green
MIDNIGHT'S CHILDREN by Salman Rushdie
TOBACCO ROAD by Erskine Caldwell
IRONWEED by William Kennedy
THE MAGUS by John Fowles
WIDE SARGASSO SEA by Jean Rhys
UNDER THE NET by Iris Murdoch
SOPHIE'S CHOICE by William Styron
THE SHELTERING SKY by Paul Bowles
THE POSTMAN ALWAYS RINGS TWICE by James M. Cain
THE GINGER MAN by J.P. Donleavy
THE MAGNIFICENT AMBERSONS by Booth Tarkington

So it looks like I have read 14 of 100. 14% is atrocious. The one thing I don't like about this list, is that all the books seem to have been written in English. Where is Dostoevsky? Where is Pasternak? Where is Kafka? Where is Tolstoy?

What about some of the English authors missing? What about Tolkien? What about Dickens? What about Hardy?

In conclusion, this list does not meet my needs. Does anyone have any others?

The Trial | Franz Kafka

Franz Kafka is an intriguing man. After reading “The Trial” in addition to “The Metamorphosis” last year, I wonder just what was going on in his life at the time. After some brief research (Everyman’s editions are amazing), three things stick out to me from his past:

1) He got engaged, called it off, got engaged again and called it off.
2) He was in and out of mental institutions.
3) He told his best friend that when he died, he should burn all of his work. “The Trial” was never supposed to be published. It was only published after Kafka’s death, a refusal of his friend to acknowledge his dying (potentially crazy) wish.

With that being said, there is some question in regards to where chapters fit. One chapter in my edition ends abruptly without much resolution. Neither the placement nor the abrupt ending matter much; the story works just the way it is presented (at least in my addition). The themes are perversely explored, and no resolution is presented. Thoughts are planted where they should remain rooted in the reader’s mind for some time. This is what makes this novel a classic.

“The Trial” was essentially about one man, generally referred to as “K”, who is accused of a crime. What ensues is nothing short of complete bureaucracy, making fun of the way the legal system “works.” Of course, the novel goes further than that - and I believe it hauntingly portrays where our society is headed. It is unarguable to me that things have become more bureaucratic over the last 30 years, and it’s sad to me to get a glimpse of just how far it can go. This novel forces you to think about that. Do you remember the last time you called a customer service line to fix a problem with your account? Have you ever had every attempt at gaining ground revoked, digging you further and further into a hole? That is exactly what K. experiences… and he does not even know why he is charged!

In addition, there is an undertone in the main character, and possibly Kafka himself, about a feeling of complete alienation and isolation from society. It’s a common theme in works of darker writers… Dostoevsky, Kafka, Bellow, Salinger… and it is evident that this resonates with many readers. If you feel you’re misunderstood, it’s more likely that you feel sympathy for the writer and a great passion for his work.

When I look back on this novel, here’s what sticks. “The Trial” was so exceedingly frustrating… Kafka did an amazing job in two chapters in particular of making my head spin as much (or more) than the main character. There were times I was so upset that I wanted to throw the book across the room. If you realize how frustrated you were experiencing the novel, can you imagine how frustrated you would be living in a society that far misplaced from functionality? Perhaps Kafka did not foresee this happening in future society; perhaps he felt that at the time he wrote his novel. One could see how that would eventually make someone ‘crazy’.

I wasn’t a fan of the writing style, and I was often bored because the theme was tackled so holistically that you felt it was overkill, which was precisely the point. You cannot help but feel as if Kafka did a good job – he made his point. It wasn’t eloquent, but these things aren’t in society. These things are frustrating and haunting – precisely what this novel was about.

Crime and Punishment | Fyodor Dostoevsky

[My apologies for the formatting. This review contains spoilers].

The worst thing to do when you have a bad memory, is to test it publicly. Since it has been a couple of weeks since I finished this novel, and at least a month since I started it, I figured I would give a brief synopsis and leave the rest of the work to Dostoevsky himself.

"Crime and Punishment" is a haunting story of an idea which twists and infects the mind of Raskolnikov, a poor young man living in Russia. As Raskolnikov becomes more reclusive, his thoughts betray him until ultimately he decides that he must test out his theory - is he a man or is he a louse? He brutally kills an old moneylender and an innocent young woman who stumbles upon him at the scene of the crime. Raskolnikov gets away, but his own thoughts drive him to a state of madness.

He is convinced that there are a select few people who have original ideas:

"Generally speaking, there are extremely few people, strangely few, born, who have a new idea, or are even capable of saying anything at all new." 262

And he is upset that society has become complacent:

"We have been content to rub along on other people's ideas." 203

As such, he writes an article in a periodical about crime. The police chief investigating the murder of the moneylender finds this article, and they have a brilliant discussion about it. So begins the cat and mouse game, where the story really gets fascinating:

"It began with the Socialists' view. You know what that is: crime is a protest against the unnatural structure of society - and only that, nothing more, and no other causes are admissible - and that's all! ...they explain everything by the 'deleterious influence of the environment: and that's all! Their favorite cliche... From that it follows that if society is properly organized, all crimes will instantly disappear, since there will be nothing to protest against, and everybody will immediately become law-abiding. Nature is not taken into account, nature is banished, nature is not supposed to exist! In their philosophy, it is not humanity, following the path of historical, living, development to the end, that will finally evolve into the perfect society, but on the contrary, a social system devised by some mathematician's brain, will instantly reorganize humanity, make it righteous and innocent in a flash, with greater speed than any living process, and without the aid of living historical development!" 255-256

The encounter reaches a climax, when Raskolnikov states that some men should not have to follow the laws of society, because they are on the earth for a greater purpose:

"there are persons who are able, or rather, not who are able but who have every right, to commit any wrong or crime, and that laws, so to say, are not made for them." 258

Later, when he bumps into the woman he loves (Sonya), he confesses all including his desire to be one of these men who are above society's laws and prove himself as a man:

"I wanted to make myself a Napoleon..."

"...The point is this: on one occasion, I put this question to myself, what if, for example, Napoleon had found himself in my shoes, with no Toulon, no Egypt, no crossing of Mont Blanc, to give his career a start, but instead of those monumental and glorious things, with simply one ridiculous old woman, who must be killed to get money from her trunk (for that career of his, you understand?) - well, would he have made up his mind to do it if there was no other way? Would he have shrunk from it, because it was so unmonumental and... and so sinful? Well, I tell you I tormented myself over that 'problem' for a terribly long time, and I was terribly ashamed when at last I realized (quite suddenly) that not only would he not shrink, but the idea would never even enter his head that it was not monumental... and he would be quite unable to understand what there was to shrink from. And if there had been no other way open to him, he would have strangled her, without giving her a chance to squeak, and without a moment's hesitation!" 415

"I did not commit murder in order to use the profit and power I gained to make myself a benefactor to humanity. Rubbish! I simply murdered; I murdered for myself, for myself alone, and whether I became a benefactor to anybody else, or like a spider, spent the rest of my life catching everybody in my web and sucking the lifeblood out of them, should have been a matter of complete indifference to me at that moment! ...And, most important, it was not money that I needed, Sonya, when I killed; it was not money, so much as something else... I know all this now... Understand me; perhaps, were I to pursue the same course, I should not commit murder again. I needed to experience something different, something else was pushing me along; what I needed to find out then, and find out as soon as possible, was whether I was a louse like everybody else or a man." 419-420

Sonya, a woman who's belief in redemption is paramount (partly due to her own lifestyle and religious beliefs), believes Raskolnikov can be saved and falls in love with the one man who has treated her kindly despite her way of life (prostitution to keep her family alive):

"When a girl's heart begins to feel pity for a man, then of course she is in the greatest danger. She begins to want to 'save' him, and make him see reason, and raise him up, and put before him nobler aims and awaken him to a new life and new activities." 476-477

After turning himself in, Raskolnikov stews in his own thoughts:

"I myself wanted to benefit men, and I would have done hundreds, thousands, of good deeds, to make up for that one piece of stupidity - not even stupidity, but simple clumsiness, since the whole idea was not nearly as stupid as it seems now, when it has failed... (failure makes anything seem stupid!). " 520

"It's the form that's wrong, the form is not aesthetically satisfactory! Well, I definitely don't understand why smashing people with bombs in a regular siege is formally more respectable! Regard for aesthetic considerations is the first sign of inability to act!" 520

"Many benefactors of mankind who did not inherit power but seized it for themselves, should have been punished at their very first steps. But the first steps of those men were successfully carried out, and therefore they were right, while mine failed, which means I had no right to permit myself that step." 546

While in jail, Raskolnikov has a dream that is very telling of his own plight:

"When he began to recover he remembered the dreams that had visited him while he lay in his fever and delirium. He had dreamt in his illness that the whole world was condemned to fall victim to a terrible, unknown pestilence which was moving on Europe out of the depths of Asia. All were destined to perish, except a chosen few, a very few. ...Whole communities, whole cities and nations, were infected and went mad. All were full of anxiety, and none could understand any other; each thought he was the sole repository of the truth and was tormented when he looked at the others, beat his breast, wrung his hands, and wept... In the whole world only a few could save themselves, a chosen handful of the pure, who were destined to found a new race of men and a new life, and to renew and cleanse the earth." 548-549

The ending, according to some, was "too hollywood." I never saw it coming, and for that, I will always remember it. Whether it was good or bad, it was surely unexpected.

This novel had moments of brilliance in it, but there was a lot of dark brooding throughout that turned a lot of people off. It was definitely not a page turner, and while some feel sorry for Raskolnikov (who was a generous but tortured man who performed evil tasks), others would surely hate him and his story. All this said, the novel was worthy of a classic and one I enjoyed reading. It wasn't as haunting as "Notes from Underground" which was so chilling that I feel the effects of the short-story years later. However, despite my poor memory, "Crime and Punishment" will also remain in my thoughts for some time to come.

Other quotes:
"'Truly great men must, I think, experience great sorrow on the earth,' he added, suddenly thoughtful, as though to himself." 264

"Everybody can find some subject of conversation - the ladies, for instance, or fashionable people, people in high society, can always talk about something, c'est de rigueur, but middling people like us, thinking ones, that is, are all awkward and tongue-tied." 337