Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Gone With The Wind
Margaret Mitchell
1936
This is an American novel about social upheaval in the South during and after the Civil War.
Anyone wanting insight and stories on how to live, how to appreciate life, and how to cope, could do much worse than reading Gone With The Wind. The book is steeped in contrasting approaches to life, some noble, some embarrassing. The trauma and disruption from the Civil War was so severe that everyone's capabilities to deal with life come extremely into focus. Many thrive, many wilt. The book is a great love story (with a wonderful, deserved ending), a gripping historical account, and crucial writing on race. But, it is the didactic role that really stays with the reader after the book is done. There are just so many people trying to get by, they are all so tragic, but some of them are admirable, and the rest, pathetic. The admirable ones, all in common, push through, work hard, endure, complain little, and look back rarely. Such a guiding way to live through any stage in life. Those who look back, think about how things were, are left behind. The post Civil War south, was, I suppose, built by those, both black and white, that worked and endured. The ones who lamented, had no role in the building.
The book is excellent. It's not as weighty as Les Miserables, not as vast as Roots, but for an epic novel it is touching and emotional. Getting drawn into it is easy. The characters become familiar. I didn't cheer for them. It's hard to not see them as racist. It's hard to sympathize with them, given that I kind of side with Lincoln and his whole idea of abolishing slavery. But, as a chronicle of the era, the book, I guess is accurate.
I liked it much more for it's historical aspects than the romance. The relationship between Scarlet and Rhett was intense, but it seemed like they could have solved a lot of there problems if they just communicated a bit more. Which is another key part of the didacticism. The writing on the war was as good as Hugo's writing on Waterloo. Much more interesting than a history book, and so much more real.
Margaret Mitchell
1936
This is an American novel about social upheaval in the South during and after the Civil War.
Anyone wanting insight and stories on how to live, how to appreciate life, and how to cope, could do much worse than reading Gone With The Wind. The book is steeped in contrasting approaches to life, some noble, some embarrassing. The trauma and disruption from the Civil War was so severe that everyone's capabilities to deal with life come extremely into focus. Many thrive, many wilt. The book is a great love story (with a wonderful, deserved ending), a gripping historical account, and crucial writing on race. But, it is the didactic role that really stays with the reader after the book is done. There are just so many people trying to get by, they are all so tragic, but some of them are admirable, and the rest, pathetic. The admirable ones, all in common, push through, work hard, endure, complain little, and look back rarely. Such a guiding way to live through any stage in life. Those who look back, think about how things were, are left behind. The post Civil War south, was, I suppose, built by those, both black and white, that worked and endured. The ones who lamented, had no role in the building.
The book is excellent. It's not as weighty as Les Miserables, not as vast as Roots, but for an epic novel it is touching and emotional. Getting drawn into it is easy. The characters become familiar. I didn't cheer for them. It's hard to not see them as racist. It's hard to sympathize with them, given that I kind of side with Lincoln and his whole idea of abolishing slavery. But, as a chronicle of the era, the book, I guess is accurate.
I liked it much more for it's historical aspects than the romance. The relationship between Scarlet and Rhett was intense, but it seemed like they could have solved a lot of there problems if they just communicated a bit more. Which is another key part of the didacticism. The writing on the war was as good as Hugo's writing on Waterloo. Much more interesting than a history book, and so much more real.
Straight From The Heart
Jean Chretien
1985
This is a memoir written by Chretien, prior to becoming Prime Minister, about his years in politics.
This book wasn't really read in any context. Chretien isn't really all that on the scene and his book is not the most relevant political book that could be read today. It was on the shelf for a while, and I've been meaning to get it. I'm glad I did. I suppose I also meant to read it before I get to his recent memoir. Again, glad I did.
I don't know if a review exists of this book that doesn't use the word candid. Candid is a trait that really should be standard for all memoirs, and there should be nothing remarkable about a book that is candid. But, it isn't, and there is. This book, I agree, is. Especially compared to Trudeau's embarrassing effort at memoir. This book isn't petty or vindictive, and Chretien does consistently portray himself as honourably, but it seems real. It provides excellent insight into the workings of Canadian governance. Chretien spends a lot of time explaining how things work, and a lot of time giving his opinion on it all. I guess it would be really interesting to sit down with Chretien and have him talk for a couple hours about all he's learned. This book is a bit like that conversation. By the end you feel less cynical about politics, and a bit more hopeful. For all the oportunism and juvenile bickering in politics, Chretien makes it really seem like parliament is populated by people with truly noble ambitions. I've always liked books like this. It is, I think, a bit dry for anyone not into politics. But is also seems to have the same familiarity that made Chretien himself so popular. Reading it could make anyone find politics more real than they had really thought before.
Jean Chretien
1985
This is a memoir written by Chretien, prior to becoming Prime Minister, about his years in politics.
This book wasn't really read in any context. Chretien isn't really all that on the scene and his book is not the most relevant political book that could be read today. It was on the shelf for a while, and I've been meaning to get it. I'm glad I did. I suppose I also meant to read it before I get to his recent memoir. Again, glad I did.
I don't know if a review exists of this book that doesn't use the word candid. Candid is a trait that really should be standard for all memoirs, and there should be nothing remarkable about a book that is candid. But, it isn't, and there is. This book, I agree, is. Especially compared to Trudeau's embarrassing effort at memoir. This book isn't petty or vindictive, and Chretien does consistently portray himself as honourably, but it seems real. It provides excellent insight into the workings of Canadian governance. Chretien spends a lot of time explaining how things work, and a lot of time giving his opinion on it all. I guess it would be really interesting to sit down with Chretien and have him talk for a couple hours about all he's learned. This book is a bit like that conversation. By the end you feel less cynical about politics, and a bit more hopeful. For all the oportunism and juvenile bickering in politics, Chretien makes it really seem like parliament is populated by people with truly noble ambitions. I've always liked books like this. It is, I think, a bit dry for anyone not into politics. But is also seems to have the same familiarity that made Chretien himself so popular. Reading it could make anyone find politics more real than they had really thought before.
