Little House on the Prairie

I remember…. When I was a child, our family lived in a rented house, and our television was still monochrome. Every Sunday afternoon we (me, my mom, and dad) would sit calmly in front of our TV, and excitedly waiting for one familiar theme song, and the scene of a prairie with its long grass, where from afar came a little girl with her dog ran across. Yes, it was the famous TV series of Little House on the Prairie. It was my family’s favorite, and it always sent warmth to my heart to see one family that was bound together by love and kindness. Thirty years after, I still remember that scene, that exciting anticipation, that theme song, and that warm feeling, all over again while reading the original book at last.

Little House on the Prairie (number three) is one of eight Little House series Laura Ingalls wrote about her childhood as pioneer in the 19^th century. It covers the period when the Ingallses move from the “Big Woods” of Wisconsin to Indian Territory of Kansas. Pa Charles Ingalls has received information that the government would soon open settlement for the whites, and so he immediately packs their belongings on the wagon, takes a long way to Kansas, and finally settles on the prairie before anybody else, so they can pick the best part. The family (Pa Charles, Ma Caroline, Mary, Laura, and baby Carrie) must start all over again to have a comfortable home. Laura tells us in details how his father builds their log house literally alone, the stable, and the furniture, and is only occasionally helped by their neighbors: Mr. Edwards and Mr. Scott.

Throughout the book Laura describes beautifully how she sees the prairie’s nature. My favorite scene is the nightingale song; it’s so serene and majestic! But their life is not always peaceful; there were the wolves which scare them at night. But the more dangerous is the presence of the Indians. Pa Ingalls’ confidence proves to be wrong; the land where they have built the house is actually the Osage tribe’s reservation. After reading how the Indians have been cruelly treated by the whites at Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee, it was interesting to read about them from the white settlers’ perspective.

There are mixed feelings among the pioneers. Mr and Mrs Scott seem to believe “the only good Indian is the dead Indian”. Ma and Mr. Edwards might not be that strict, but they dislike the Indians very much. Only Pa is sensible enough to try to make good relationship with them. At one occasion, he even sits and smokes with an Indian in front of the fireplace. And the Indian then saved them when other Indian tribes want to harm the whites. In the end of the chapter about the horrible war cry of the Indians, which makes everybody sleepless at night, Laura tells us that ‘no matter what Mr. Scott said, Pa did not believe that the only good Indian was a dead Indian’.

I too have mixed feelings about this book. Had I read this in childhood, it might have been my favorite, and I would have praised it very high. But, as an adult, and because I have just read an awful history of the Indians and the whites, well… in the end I was troubled as much as I was entertained by this book. Pa Ingalls is kind enough to not make the Indians his enemy, but on the other hand he is just the same as those white settlers, who, knowing that they have settled on an Indian Territory, still claim the land as theirs. They just don’t want to think about the Indians; it’s enough that they don’t harm their families.

Laura’s discussion with her Pa echoed my thought:

Pa: “White people are going to settle all this country, and we get the best land because we get here first and take our pick. Now do you understand?”
Laura: “Yes Pa. But, Pa, I thought this was Indian Territory. Won’t it make the Indians mad to have to—“
Pa: “No more questions, Laura. Go to sleep.”

The way Pa sharply interrupts Laura’s phrase only shows that his conscience actually troubles him, but he shuts it up to justify his decision to settle there. He knows that it is only rumors that the government will open settlement, but he hurries up there in order to get the best land. It is only another proof how the whites are greedy by nature, although some of them are good and kind-hearted as Charles Ingalls.

But…. enough of the dark atmosphere of human injustice! Let’s talk about love, because (almost) throughout the book, Laura always speaks about love; the warmth of family life. I admire Mr. Edwards, their bachelor neighbor, who on Christmas day takes troubles within the thick freezing snow, only to get to the city’s store to buy presents for Mary and Laura. How sweet and touching is that scene! The Christmas spirit is really there….

And for all that…. I granted four stars for Little House on the Prairie.

~~~~~~~~~~

I read Harper Trophy (Harper Collins) paperback edition

This book is counted as:

13^th book for 2014 TBR Pile Challenge

83^rd book for The Classics Club Project

3^rd book for Twelve Months of Classic Literature 2014: freebie (Children Lit)

Jane Eyre: Final Review

After Wuthering Heights about three years ago, this year I finally got a chance to read another Brontë’s. Charlotte’s Jane Eyre was definitely more enjoyable than Emily’s WH, but I think WH was more intriguing than JE. From the books, we could recognize the different personalities of both sisters; Emily is more passionate, while Charlotte is much reserved. As Jane Eyre has been taken as Charlotte’s autobiographical novel, we can assume Jane’s voice is Charlotte’s own voice.

Jane Eyre is an orphan who is adopted by her uncle, Mr. Reed. After he died, Mrs. Reed dislikes her, and with her children, treats Jane with hostility of being so sensible for a child her age. Jane is quite relieved when she goes to a charity school of Lowood Institute. But there she is also tortured by the poor accommodation. She endures it however, and even becomes a teacher for several years, before finally leaves it forever when she gets a job as governess in Thorfield hall.

Thornfield Hall belongs to an eccentric landlord, Mr. Rochester—Jane’s pupil is his ward. Mr. Rochester lived alone in his big house with the housekeeper, Mrs. Fairfax, and his ward, Adele. Even if you haven’t read this book, you would guess that soon the master and the governess would fall in love to each other. When there is a love story, there must be an obstacle to their relationship. Firstly, their age difference and their social status; but love is more sensible than social laws.

But then, it is revealed that Mr. Rochester is actually still married to his lunatic wife, whom he has secretly been hiding on the house’ attic. This fact gives the couple an immense blow. Mr. Rochester might think that he is eligible to marry another woman, as his present wife is practically lifeless. But to a sensible girl like Jane Eyre, who is a reverend’s daughter and has been educated in strict Christian morality, to become a married man’s mistress is not possible. So she runs away from Thornfield Hall, from happiness, and from her dear Mr. Rochester, to avoid degradation and humiliation. Is that the end of the story? Of course not, Charlotte then takes us to follow Jane’s new life. Whether she will or will not meet Mr. Rochester again, is a question you must keep in your mind while reading on this book to the end. I won’t give you any spoiler, if you have not read it. :)

To me, Jane Eyre is rather dull, especially when Mr. Rochester was absent, or have not yet appeared (in the first part). It is perhaps typical of Victorian women’s character of narration: emotionless and submissive. Or maybe it’s Charlotte’s own personality which was reflected to this story. Either way, I remembered that I have almost thought to put this book down, when Mr. Rochester appeared. Then, this book was not so colorless as before. He is so vigorous and full of energy, that the pace of second part suddenly felt much faster than before. Jane Eyre too, seems to become more alive everytime she converse with Rochester. Their dialogues are always witty, and are actually the best part of the book!

In Jane Eyre, I sensed the struggle of balancing the freedom (for happiness) and the principle (of conscience). In marriage, unlike most Victorian women, Jane seeks love, because marriage without love can’t guarantee her happiness. That’s why she refused St. John Rivers’ proposal, despite of the honor and security he can provide. If Jane could not marry Rochester, and won’t marry other men whom she doesn’t love, what would she get? Yes, she is now a quite rich woman, but I think not that rich that she can support her entire life without having to work. For a woman in that era, I believe this is a difficult choice. But Jane takes it confidently. Maybe this is what the readers see as early feminism: the courage to be herself; to follow her own principle, and not to bow down to the customs.

[spoiler alert] Actually, the feminism theory could be justified if the story ends up there. However, when Charlotte made Rochester fell completely (physically as well as mentally), to open a way of bringing a happy ending to this love story, then I began questioning whether Charlotte saw feminism as woman overpowering man. Is that what she really thought? Of course we would never know, and we would be wondering over and over again, what this novel is really about. Maybe….this is, after all, just about the power of love and a struggle of a woman….

Three and a half stars for Jane Eyre.

~~~~~~~~~~~

I read Penguin Red Classics paperback edition

This book is counted as:

2^nd book for Twelve Months of Classic Literature:2014 (Victorian Lit)

82^nd book for The Classics Club Project

80^th book for 1001 Books You Must Read Before You Die

Greyfriars Bobby

Reading the synopsis and looking at this book’s cover (and later on browsing the true story on the internet) are enough to assume that Greyfriars Bobby would be a sad and gloomy book. I have delayed reading it for few years, but when I finally got through it, Greyfriars Bobby turned out to be very enjoyable. There were quite plenty of tears throughout the book; but there were also much cheerful times with Bobby, the brave and loyal Skye terrier dog.

Bobby belonged to a farmer who had a sweet little daughter in Edinburgh, Scotland. However, the only human to whom Bobby ever gave his love was Auld Jock, the poor old shepherd who worked for the farmer. A tight bond tied them both, and nobody could enter their intimate relationship till the end. Auld Jock was a simple and kind man; he did not talk much. Maybe that’s what bound them together; they had each other and loved each other exclusively. Then Auld Jock got pneumonia and died. Although he was poor, he had saved his small salary to get a descent funeral; he was buried at Greyfriars church graveyard.

Since then, Bobby’s home was on his master’s grave. There he lay at night, and never left Auld Jock’s grave unguarded, for whatever reason. He only went to an eatery every day to get his meal—thanks to the kind-hearted eatery’s owner: Mr. Traill. The church gardener and graveyard keeper, Mr. Brown, chased Bobby many times away from the grave, but he (Bobby) always managed to get a way to come back. Until Mr. Brown finally gave up, and even came to love Bobby at the end. Poor children around the church were also Bobby’s fanatic lovers. It’s interesting to learn how a little dog could pour so much love upon the wretched children, that they could grow up as loving adults. When the City Council wanted to eradicate stray dogs from the city, these children collected money (seven shillings) from their group and some poor people who loved Bobby, to save him. It was so sweet to read how these poor people sacrificed their small money for a little dog. It was proof of the power of love which can make difference.

Lucky for Bobby, the Lord Provost who was an animal lover—moved by the children’s donation for Bobby—paid Bobby’s license and made him a special collar. And so, Bobby could spend his old days peacefully at the churchyard, guarding his master’s grave ‘till he finally could be united with his master in heaven, fourteen years after his master’s death.

It appalled me to read about the fanatic faith of a dog towards his master—for fourteen years! Nothing could change Bobby’s mind from returning to the grave at night. One day he was distracted by a military parade to a nearby castle which was located on a steep hill. Just as the night signal was heard, Bobby frantically searched for a way out. It was a foggy night, and no living creature could possibly get through down the hill. Well…except Bobby! He groped his way blindly in the dark, he even bruised himself while descending the hill. But he didn’t care, even, perhaps, if he should have died; he would do everything to be on his master’s grave again. That was the only home he knew.

Little Bobby is not just a touching story of a very brave, loving, and faithful dog, but he taught us about the real love. Sometimes it does not need to be expressed in words or cuddles, but only to be felt deep in one’s heart. It is about taking and giving what little each has; it is about living together what life offers them. More than that, Bobby taught me about faithfulness and persistency; something that we, humans, lack of.

I must thank my blogger friend, Alvina, who gave me this book—I think nearly two years ago (or three??). I am a bit sorry to have delayed in reading it, but I am awfully grateful at the same time for finding this treasure at last. Four stars to Greyfriars Bobby!

~~~~~~~~~

I read Indonesian translation, published by Gramedia Pustaka Utama

This book is counted as:

6^th book for Back To The Classics 2014 (A Classic That's Been Adapted Into a Movie)

11^th book for 2014 TBR Pile Challenge

81^st book for The Classics Club Project

Of Human Bondage

Approaching the end of year 2014, I think I have found a new masterpiece: Maugham’s Of Human Bondage! It was based on Maugham’s real life, and therefore it was very vividly portrayed. Following the fate of the protagonist Philip Carrey; I felt like having been knowing a real intimate friend from his childhood, and been growing with him. Maybe it’s because Philip is Maugham himself, that he could pour out all his detailed emotion into the narration. Of Human Bondage has been one of my most incredible reading experiences throughout the year.

Philip was a nine year orphan boy with a clubfoot, and an only child. He was taken care of by his uncle, a vicar in a small village. He was brought up to enter a religious profession, but his deformity has made him a shy and inferior boy, and he got much trouble in his social life. Between the rigid expectation of his uncle and his tortured feeling for the world which (he felt) did not accept him, his Catholic faith cooled away.

With a great appetite for beauty, knowledge, and adventure, Phillip spent his youth in German as a clerk—which he found too boring; then in Paris to study art-painting—but later found out he was not talented; and finally entered medical school to be a Doctor like his father. However, during his study, he was entangled in a difficult relationship with a girl named Mildred. It was a painful kind of love; and Philip let himself to be enslaved by his passion; and as a result, ignoring his study and draining his savings. Luckily he met a humble and warm family, the Athelnys, who poured their love and affection to him. It was just another proof that love and positive energy are the only way to help human from destruction.

I have a deep sympathy for Philip. Deep inside, he is tender-hearted; he can easily be moved when others show him little affection. A man like Philip needs to be understood and accepted. And that is what he lacked of. His deformity banished him from society and he became extremely sensitive and egoist. Maugham portrayed Philip’s struggle so vividly and detailed. It must have been an interesting subject if you study psychology or have interest in human character. As a bildungsroman, of course young Philip is far from perfect; on the contrary, you would want to scold him every now and then for his various mistakes. You would often want to shout at him: “Don’t be stupid, Phil!” At times he would act normally, but next time he would stumble all over again to a trouble, then you would be like: “Oow…not again!?”

Overall, Of Human Bondage is a man’s search for the value in life. When Philip was young, he judged everything by its beauty and perfection. However, life taught him much better than any art school, about the real value of life. His poverty scrapped his pride; and made him an affectionate doctor who was loved by his poor patients. I also believe, that without his folly and wretched experience with Mildred, he would have always been the irritating and cynical person he used to be. For some of us, love and kindness are our genuine personalities; but for others, who have been in more difficult circumstances, hard times and sorrows are needed to polish one’s hardness to milder heart. Philip Carey belongs to this.

Of Human Bondage is a sweet story of one human’s strives to be freed from what he thought of as bondage: other people’s rejection, religion, poverty, personal handicaps; all the wretchedness of life. We, human, always want to be free, before we really realize what that means. Maugham (through Philip) opened our eyes of what the real value of life: love and family, kindness and friendship.

This book has given me a very satisfying reading experience. Together with Philip I have been through most of human emotions. No wonder that it becomes Maugham’s masterpiece. I can feel that he has poured out his emotion totally into this story, and I admired him very much for that. Five stars for Of Human Bondage, and Mr. Maugham.

~~~~~~~~~~

I read Signet Classics paperback edition

This book is counted as:

5^th book for Back To The Classics 2014 (A 20th Century Classic)

79^th book for 1001 Books You Must Read Before You Die

80^th book for The Classics Club Project 

Tender is the Night

Once or twice a year you would have stumbled upon a book that leaves your soul troubled. This year Tender is the Night was it for me. This book is the last completed novel from F. Scott Fitzgerald; he was in the writing process of The Last Tycoon when he died in 1940. I am not quite sure whether Fitzgerald has intended this book to be his semi-autobiographical story, but the characters and the conflicts have a lot of similarities with the writer’s private life. Doctor Richard “Dick” and Nicole Diver was a lovely couple among the upper-middle class of Americans, who, in the 1920s had great interest in travelling to Europe to learn the culture and expand their businesses.

Although it seems, at first, that the story would be narrated by an adolescent Hollywood actress, Rosemary Hoyt; it would turn out on the second and third book, that it was all actually about the Divers. Dick Diver was a psychiatric, while Nicole was his wife as well as his patient. She was a patient in a psychiatry clinic when Dick first met her; a very pretty young girl with schizophrenia. She was very in love with Dick, and though he first declined, Dick finally agreed to marry her after she was released from the clinic. It was easy to assume that Nicole represented Zelda, Fitzgerald’s schizophrenic wife; while Dick’s faith in this story was how Fitzgerald saw Zelda’s mental disorder which has ruined their marriage and, at certain point, the writer’s personal life and career.

Apart from her beauty, Dick married Nicole also for her money. Witnessing his father’s life in poverty apparently encouraged young Dick to pursue his ambition as a famous medical doctor. He might have been successful, and his marriage might have been a happy one, if their course did not accidentally cross with that of Rosemary Hoyt. Young, innocent, beautiful; she had just the perfect combination to corrupt a reserved man (son of a Reverend) who was struggling with his schizophrenic wife. After the short affair, Dick seemed to lose balance of his life. He fell to alcoholism and neglected his career; he became bitter and cynical to others, that his friends excluded him. On the contrary, as he was weaker, Nicole became stronger. She found that she could slowly detach herself from her husband’s influence, and found another love from her longtime suitor.

Nicole is like a parasite to her husband, although she did not do it on purpose, as it was because of her mental illness and instability. But I think the struggles to protect and to balance his wife for more than ten years of marriage have absorbed Dick’s vitality and morality. Nicole’s mental illness was triggered by the incest committed by her father. Maybe this had something to do in Dick’s fall, like a poison that never completely vanishes from the air once it is polluted. In the end what Dick has done to Nicole is a sacrifice; no matter whether he has done it purely for love, or innocently for his ambitions. Whichever it was, I think Dick, or (if this story truly represents the writer’s feeling) Fitzgerald, has done a goodness in bringing a schizophrenic person to reach her fullness of life at last. Sometimes, great deeds demand greater sacrifice….

It was really heart-wrenching to follow Dick’s struggle after Nicole left him. I kept asking myself, how Nicole could be so selfish towards her husband after what he has given her. But to expect an unbalanced woman to guide her husband back to the right path is impossible. So I guess, in the end, I could not blame any of the two. Their faith is inevitable. I think Fitzgerald himself only wanted to express his feeling to the world by this story.

Just like in The Great Gatsby, I think Fitzgerald used a lot of metaphors in this book. Things which I thought were irrelevant to the plot, might have been these metaphors. I felt there were a lot more than what I could grab now. Compared to Gatsby, Tender is the Night is slower and sometimes rather flat, but maybe it’s me who still cannot find the deeper meanings; I don’t think Fitzgerald has ever wasted sentences to no purpose. I think it’s a good excuse to read the book again in the future; then, perhaps, I might find it more beautiful than what I think now.

Nevertheless, I give four stars for Tender is the Night in this first reading.

~~~~~~~~~

I read Penguin Classics hardback edition

This book is counted as:

79^th book for The Classics Club Project

6^th book for Back to the Classics 2014 (American Classic)

78^th book for 1001 Books You Must Read Before YouDie

The House of Mirth: Final Review

I think I have just found a favorite female author, who can be juxtaposed with Zola’s genius, intense, and beautiful naturalist style: Edith Wharton. The House of Mirth was my first book by her, and I loved it so much!

Lily Bart is 29 years old, and in the turn of the century, a girl of her age should have married. Lily is very charming, but she is a poor orphan girl who depends on her conservative aunt’s generosity. Nevertheless, she can make her way in the socialite world. Since it is her only world; she has grown up and was brought for one aim: to get a rich husband and live comfortably. The problem was not that no one attracted to Lily; on the contrary, she was charming and intelligent, and had many admirers. Lily’s difficulties started because she could not make her mind of what she really wanted. On one hand she needed to marry a rich man to support her luxury taste, while on the other, she yearned for the freedom of choosing her own life. Through the book she constantly had this doubts; and as she was too lazy to make decision, she kept putting the problem behind, until it exploded, and drown her down.

It might not become too bad if Lily has lived in our modern era. However—and this is what Wharton wanted to emphasize—in the late 19^th century, American high society only cared for money and fame. Whoever had one or both would be welcomed to the circle; they didn’t care about morality. Friendship and love were often depended on status; one would praise immoral men and women if they had influences, which one could benefit to step higher on the ladder of so called society. In this circle did Lily accidentally hurt a rich and influenced woman, and in order to take revenge—and to divert attention from her scandalous affairs—she spread negative issues about Lily to ruin her reputation.

In the midst of hypocrite society, a girl would certainly ruinous just because of one vague scandal, no matter whether she really guilty or not. And since Lily was poor and did not know other life apart from what she was brought up for, she could not runaway from the ruin. Her friends knew that she was innocent, but they could not help her lest their ‘patron’ abandoned them too.

Like Zola, Wharton was a naturalist too; their style has a strong similarity, although Zola’s is stronger while Wharton’s a bit softer. Like in Zola’s, I loved Wharton’s metaphors and her beautiful prose, like in this passage. In terms of naturalism theory, The House of Mirth tells us how human being is produced and shaped according to their natural habitat. Wharton also pointed out the moral corruption on the early 20^th century, while stock market was being introduced and many people became suddenly rich by it. They were worshipping money and status, but neglecting humanity (you can read more of my analysis of the theme in my WEM posts). And Wharton crafted them in a beautifully-flowing prose.

Five stars for The House of Mirth! And I would certainly read Mrs. Wharton’s other novels.

~~~~~~~~~~

I read Penguin English Library paperback edition

This book is counted as:

5^th book for Back To The Classics 2014 (Woman Author)

78^th book for The Classics Club Project

77^th book for 1001 Books You Must Read Before You Die

The Well-Educated Mind Self-Project

Sense and Sensibility

Confession: I have been dreading reading Jane Austen since I took The Classics Club project. Why? Because I regarded her books as chicklit—or chicklit in 18^th century style if you like. Basically, romance is never my favorite genre, unless it’s only an added touch to a much serious topic. So, when I joined Jenna’s Austen in August, I was really gambling; I didn’t know what I was about to read, and even was not sure whether I would finish it. But at least, I said to myself, I would be able to say in the end of the event, that I have tried. So, I picked Sense and Sensibility, more because it was the lightest of all. I have tried once to read Pride and Prejudice, but could not get through more than one chapter.

Sense and Sensibility is more or less a character analysis of the society around 17^th century, where Austen lived. In particular, it’s about Elinor and Marianne Dashwood—the sense and the sensibility. The sisters are from middle class family, and in age to find a husband—like any girls of their age in that century. Austen brought us to see the different approach of both sisters in trying to secure their love lives. Elinor—strong and reserved—used more of her logic than emotion; while Marianne—expressive and emotional—used her emotion more than logic. They were both so different, but they loved and took care of each other so well. Elinor fell in love with the simple and shy Edward Ferrars, while Marianne was attracted to the handsome and flamboyant Willoughby. Everyone but Elinor was deceived by both men’s manners. I think you would guess the end of both men, although—as usual—there will be twists before all ended up, quite predictably.

Of the two, I think I prefer Elinor; maybe because I am more like her than Marianne. Elinor could see things deeper, and could separate the essential from the trivial. While Marianne, who only saw the outer appearance or things on the surface, were often deceived. I think Elinor’s qualities made her tougher, the qualities I like from a woman and a friend. Expressive person like Marianne is used to bore and tire me; and they are often more vulnerable too.

Beyond the sisters, I also learned about different types of people in the society, which Austen satirized cleverly in this book. Her idea to portrait how people treated marriage as merely business, was very witty, but I think her style was rather flat and boring. The first half was almost nonsense that I seriously thought to dump it. But, fortunately, I refused to give up, as someone said that it will pick up if I keep staying with it. And it was.

In the end, what did I get? Not much. I can say now that I have read Jane Austen at least one book, but beyond that, I am at the same stage as before. I do not like her book. Period. And I think it would be the end of it. I don’t despise her; it’s just that her style does not fit my taste.

Three stars for Sense and Sensibility.

~~~~~~~~~~

I read e-book from feedbooks dot com

This book is counted as:

Austen in August

77^th book for The Classics Club Project

76^th book for 1001 Books You Must Read Before You Die

The Debacle by Émile Zola

All these times I have been thinking that Dickens’ A Tale of Two Cities would be my most favorite historical-war-novel ever. It’s just so memorable; with its famous opening “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times […]” and the pure love showed by Sidney Carton. In term of war, War and Peace was thicker in ‘war nature’ then A Tale, but Tolstoy emphasized too much on war idealism that it became partly too serious. But now I think I have found my new favorite historical-war-novel that exceeded those two: The Debacle.

The Debacle is the only historical novel by Émile Zola; it depicted the Franco-Prussian war (1870-1871), and became the penultimate novel of Rougon-Macquart series. The story began in the middle of the war; the main character is Jean Macquart—a farmer who had been in another war before—but now the Corporal of the 7^th army corps. Another important character is Maurice Levasseur—a young man brought up well and educated—now a soldier under Jean’s command. At first they were indifferent of each other because of their different backgrounds; but in wars, status, education, wealth, everything that distinguishes someone dissolves and replaced by humanity. And so, having struggled together, Jean and Maurice became intimate friends, even closer than blood brother. They were willing to risk their own lives for the sake of the other.

In terms of the war, Zola has painstakingly written a very vivid picture of war as human-killing machine. It was compounded by French army’s bad coordination, incapability of the generals, and the indecision of the Emperor. France has been deluded itself by thinking of repeating the past grandeur of Napoleon. Many people could not realize that the Second Empire was corrupted, and that the Prussians was now much stronger than they have thought. Ironically, it was a civilian gentleman named Weiss (Maurice’s brother-in-law) who first predicted the great defeat of France, but at that time no one listened to him and even thought him a traitor. Moreover, Weiss—with no military background but his local knowledge of the land—could see what the Prussians would do; while none of the military general could read their strategy. It’s more than irony, it’s a stupidity. And what made the tragedy even tragic, was the stupidity of several people that finally destroyed many lives—the soldiers as well as civilians.

Zola explained to us his analysis of the root of the problems in chapter one – part one:

“The Empire grown old, still acclaimed in a plebiscite but basically rotten because it had weakened the idea of patriotism by destroying liberty, and then turning back to liberalism too late and thereby hastening its own undoing because it was ready to collapse as soon as it stopped satisfying the lust for pleasure it had let loose; the army certainly admirable as a brave lot of men, and still wearing the laurels of the Crimea and Italy, but adulterated by the system of paid substitutes, still in the old routine of the Africa school, too cocksure of victory to face the great effort of modern technique; and then the generals, most of them nonentities and eaten up with rivalries and some of them quite-stupefyingly ignorant, and at their head the Emperor, a sick man and vacillating, deceived and self-deceiving, and all facing this terrible adventure into which they were blindly hurling themselves, with no serious preparation, like a stampede of scared sheep being led to the slaughter.”

It was painful to read how the soldiers being maneuvered now here, then there, back and forth, and in poor conditions: fatigue, hungry, and distressed. And this was how I loved Zola’s The Debacle. Because it is not just a historical novel, it’s a living portrayal of a corrupted nation. Not only honest, but it was also painful; the ending especially. Actually it reminded me of Germinal, in the sense of a faint hope in future beneath the ruinous present. Like Etiènne Lantier, Jean Macquart was a simple man, and because of that, he never had the upper/middle class sentiment about French past grandeur. He was perhaps the least afflicted by the idea of beaten by the barbarians of Germany, and that was how he did not end like Maurice.

Zola proved himself as a great writer. The Debacle won’t be as it is if he had not done very thorough researches on the war and on how people reacted over it. And he (as usual) crafted the history and his naturalism theory on Rougon-Macquart in his beautiful, powerful, and intense narration. It instantly became my next favorite, along with Germinal, L’Assommoir, and La Bète Humaine.

Bravo Zola! Five stars for you!

~~~~~~~~~

I read Penguin Classics edition

This book is counted as:

8^th book for 2014 TBR Pile Challenge

76^th book for The Classics Club Project

4^th book for Historical Fiction Challenge (for 2014)

The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire: Final Review

As I have always been fascinated by the Ancient Rome, The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire seems to be a required reading for me. And indeed, I have always been curious about the cause of Roman’s fall. It is tragic to think that the most civilized portion of mankind could possibly end in such a great ruin. It would be interesting to know, in what point exactly the decline began. Gibbon’s history on this subject has been published in three volumes for thirteen years, but the copy I read for History Reading Challenge 2014 is the abridged version. And now I’m so glad I have picked it in the first place!

Gibbon opened the story with Pax Romana (an era of stability and prosperity of the Empire) which was brought firstly by Augustus. Augustus’ reign was the beginning of Roman Empire, after 500 years of being a Republic. He set the Principate, the ideological foundation of the Empire (strengthening civic life, economic, cultural, legal, and religions). During the first two centuries Roman people lived in peace and prosperity, until the reign of the Antonines. Commodus could perhaps be pointed out as the culprit of Roman’s descent due to his capricious character. Later on Severus conversed from the Principate to military monarchy, a first sign, I think, of the end of the stability era.

After that Diocletian appointed Maximian as co-emperor and two others as junior co-emperors; thus shared the Empire in a tetrarchy. It was the first version of Western-Eastern division of Rome. Constantine then moved the capital of Rome to the east, Constantinopel. He was also the first Emperor who converted to Christian, and thus the vast establishment of Christianity. But it was Theodosius who later made Christian as official state religion. The definitive separation of Roman Empire took place during Valentinian’s reign. He retained the Western Rome, and trusted the Eastern to his brother Valens. The Western Rome fell completely after series of attacks from the Barbarians in 476 AD, during the reign of Agustulus.

The most famous emperor of the Byzantine Empire (the Eastern Rome) was Justinian, who shared his throne with his wife Theodora. He tried to renew the Roman Empire with several conquests, but it appeared to weaken it instead. In the meantime, and along the slow descent of the great empire, there were the rises of some sects (Paulicians and Manichean); Mahomet with his new religion (Islam); the increasing power of the Ottoman Empire (the Turks); and at last the Crusades and the besiege of Constantinopel. Finally, 1453 AD marked the fall of Byzantine Empire, the last remnant of once the greatest civilization ever existed on earth.

To me, this book is a very long journey, and sometimes it felt too tedious (and this is the abridged version, don’t forget!) Maybe it’s just me who is not familiar with history, but I think Gibbon has often painstakingly overstretched the history coverage. For instance, he wrote very detailed story about Christianity as religion, or the character of Mahomet as a prophet. I mean, this is about Rome, and although I know that Christianity and Mahomet both had great influence in the decline and fall of Rome, we didn’t need to learn about them so deeply it made you sometimes think you are studying a history of the Church.

But apart from that, I loved Gibbon’s beautiful poetic style to write this history, making the serious topic became quite entertaining. Although I think Gibbon had skepticism with him when Christianity was concerned, while I believe a historian should be neutral. In the end Gibbon concluded that the decline and fall of Roman Empire was influenced by so many different circumstances. First, it was the weakness of her own (Roman) Emperors; then the rise and establishment of Christian and Islam; the Crusades; and the rise of the Barbarians, the Saracens, and the Turks.

After reading this, I still believe that Rome should stick on being Republic instead of becoming Monarchy. The disadvantage of Monarchy is the entire kingdom is in one’s hand. And quite often the Emperor is not capable to handle it. Especially for Rome which was at the time Augustus ruled has been too large. By being Republic, at least the Consul did not rule by himself, there are the Senate and the Tribune. Of course there are several weaknesses in Roman Republic as I have learned from Cicero’s biography by Antony Everitt, and even with ambitious men like Julius Caesar every now and then, I think Roman Republic is still better than Monarchy, as long as they did not fall into the hand of a dictator or tyrant. By the way, I still also think that Julius Caesar is the culmination point of Roman’s greatness. Yes, Roman would see a Pax Romana later, but Caesar’s reign was the crucial point; it was him who opened the way of a Monarchy.

Anyway, as Gibbon has said: “Instead of inquiring why the Roman empire was destroyed, we should rather be surprised that it had subsisted so long.” And that is so true. The fall of Roman, after so long of dominating the world, would have come in any time anyway. The world needs a revolution from ancient to modern, and I think Roman—Republic and Empire—have provided us with valuable legacy on almost every aspects of life.

Three and a half stars for The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire!

~~~~~~~~~~

I read Penguin Classics edition

This book is counted as:

4^th book for History Reading Challenge 2014

75^th book for The Classics Club Project

I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings

In honor of the late Maya Angelou—the honorable author, poet, and activist—who died on May 28, 2014, I decided to read her beautiful autobiography: I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings. Really, before actually reading it, I have never realized that this book is really an autobiography of Maya Angelou, not just an autobiographical fiction. I just realized my fault when Marguerite told how her brother, who loved her so much, used to call her Maya (from Mya sister). It was then that I realized that is has been Maya Angelou herself who was telling her story.

Maya was only three years old when her parents divorced. They sent her and her big brother Bailey (four years old) to Stamps, Arkansas, by train, with only a porter to accompany them, to live with their grandmother. This journey (and the sense of abandonment) wounded both children. In Stamps, the grandmother, Annie Henderson, lived with her crippled son Willie (Uncle Willie). It was the two of them who raised Maya and Bailey. Momma Henderson (Maya’s appellation for her grandmother) ran the Store where the Blacks (mostly very poor cotton pickers) shopped their daily needs. Mrs. Henderson was a strong and respectable woman, and the way she maintained her dignity against the Whites’ insults was tremendous. During her life in Stamps, Maya witnessed the struggles as well as the bitter hopes of the Blacks amidst the Whites dominion. All these built the inferiority (if not hatred) in little Maya towards the Whites, although she almost never saw them in reality. She even felt guilty of having Shakespeare as her favorite author because of his whiteness.

When Maya was still nine or ten years old, her father came to Stamps and brought the brother and sister to St. Louis, to stay with their beautiful mother. One day Maya was raped by her mother’s boyfriend, and this changed her life completely. She became very quiet, and suddenly Maya grew much more mature than her age. I think Maya’s turning point optimism of being black was in her eight grade graduation, when Henry Reeds led the audience to sing Negro National Anthem with pride. It was then that Maya started to realize of her own value, as a Black, and as a human being. Her visit to her daddy’s home was another phase of Maya’s transformation, where she eventually found her own strength.

I liked this book from the first page; in fact, it did not feel like reading an autobiography at all. Maya Angelou was certainly a great story teller, and her way of re-telling her own bitter past was filled with hope and optimism, instead of condemnation or lamentation. As a title, “I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings” offers a deeper meaning of Angelou’s sight of her people. I found an interesting article about this, which revealed that the title was taken from a poem by an African poet: Paul Laurence Dunbar—and it is a beautiful poem! When the world has not been free from prejudices and discrimination—even until now—what the oppressed must do is to maintain hope, and to keep in mind that as long as they think they are free, no one can snatch that from them.

A beautiful and inspiring reading indeed! Four stars for Maya Angelou!

~~~~~~~~~~~

I read Ballantine Books Mass Market edition

This book is counted as:

6th book for 2014 TBR Pile Challenge

74^th book for The Classics Club Project

72^nd book for 1001 Books You Must Read Before You Die

If on a winter’s night a traveler: Final Review

This must have been the most deceitful book I have ever read in my life: If on a winter’s night a traveler. From the unique title I must have realized that this won’t be a regular thing. It’s an unfinished sentence; plus it was obviously written as an ordinary sentence, without capital letter on each word, as a title should usually be written. I have also read several reviews and a few analysis, and all of them promised an extraordinary reading experience from Signor Calvino. So, I encouraged myself to read it, together with several other bloggers. And what an adventure we have had for about two weeks!

Calvino addresses us in the form of his main (male) protagonist, The Reader. He uses second person point of view, which made it felt like he is talking to me, who was reading the book, personally. The Reader has just bought the new novel from Italo Calvino: If on a winter’s night a traveler. It’s about a man who arrives at train station in a “mission”. He is instructed by his ‘organization’ to meet someone (a connection) but somehow he missed it. I knew instantly that it would be a conspiracy-thriller. However, as the story reached the most exciting part, the Reader found that his copy was somehow mixed with the signatures of another novel. He went to the bookstore to complain, and got an ‘unspoiled’ copy as a replacement. However, when he opened the book, it turned out to be a different book. He was disappointed, but he was interested in this second book as well. So he read it anyway. But the same thing happened, the second book ended abruptly, and when he wanted to get the unspoiled copy, again, he got another novel.

The incident repeated for ten times, which forced our Reader to read ten different unfinished novels in the process of getting the complete one. During his quest for the right books, he met a Second Reader, a girl named Ludmilla, a passionate reader like himself. He got attracted to her, but just like his desire to read books with complete ending, his desire to possess Ludmilla’s heart for himself was blocked by some incidents; which—interestingly—was also connected to his book quest.

This is indeed an extraordinary book! Only a genius writer could create many plots which are entangled to each other like this. And if you read all of the novels—unfinished, though, they are—you’ll see that Calvino is a great story teller. Even when I knew that my reading would end abruptly in a few chapters, I still enjoyed the stories. My favorite was perhaps “Around an empty grave”—well, I always have a soft spot for the Indians, I think….

Our question at the end must be: what did Calvino wrote this complex book for? After having a thorough analysis I believe Calvino had two big messages to convey regarding the literary world. He criticized readers who read innocently, only for satisfying their desire, without trying to dig deeper into what the author tried to communicate. Calvino analogized it with the ‘void’—he mentioned this word many times—below the words in books. He also alerted us that in some point readers are not as free as they think; that there are the hands of the publishing industry who are controlling our reading behavior. We deal with it in different way. The Reader confronted them directly; while Ludmilla refused to join him because she didn’t want to know about any aspect of the book but the story itself. While Irnerio—Ludmilla’s friend—chose to stop reading at all. But in reality, none of them were actually completely free; not even Irnerio, who, instead of reading the books, produced handicraft using books as the media.

I believe there are more in this story than what I have been analyzed; one of them is feminism issue, which I sensed within the book (in Lotaria’s seminar, as well as dominant female in several of the novels). There are also the thoughts of erasing past consequences (zero moment), and restart from zero. What was it? I don’t think I would ever find out the answer, as this book, for me, is not the kind that I would like to reread someday. No, this is a unique book, and an extraordinary reading, but once is surely enough!

Three and a half stars for Signor Calvino!

~~~~~~~~~~~

I read e-book from BookFi dot org

This book is counted as:

73^rd book for The Classics Club Project

72nd book for 1001 Books You Must Read Before YouDie

The Hound of the Baskervilles

I didn't read the whole book, only
The Hound of the Baskervilles

The Hound of the Baskervilles might be the last Holmes novella I’ll ever read, and it’s actually the one I have been most curious about. My first interest in Holmes was A Study in Scarlet, as it combines historical facts with detective story. This one is more exciting because it combines gothic-thriller with detective investigation. I was actually interested in it because of the dark theme, more than the detective aspects. And it turned to be quite enjoyable to the end.

There is a trace of malignity in the Baskervilles family; especially Hugo Baskerville. There was a legend of a hellhound which was started around 17 century, when Hugo sold his soul to the devil in order to capture a farmer’s daughter he wanted to marry. He was later found dead in the moor surrounding the Baskervilles Hall, with a huge black hound tore out his throat. The legend became the hound of the Baskervilles, and it was believed to be a curse to all Baskerville descendents.

Sir Charles Baskervilles was found dead of heart attack outside the Baskerville Hall; a huge animal’s footprints were found near the body. Fearing for the family curse, Dr. Mortimer, a family’s friend, consulted Sherlock Holmes about the arrival of the new Baronet: Sir Henry Baskerville, who would move in to the Baskerville Hall. Holmes took the case very excitingly, because he didn’t believe much in superstition and legends. So along the fifteen chapters of this novella, Doyle brought us to the thrill terror and exciting actions surrounding the gloom moor, to reveal the murderer, and to prevent the next one. I was mostly curious about the hellhound; did it really exist, or was it just a disguised attempt of the villain to murder the Baskervilles?

When I said (in paragraph one) that this would be my last Holmes to read, it is because normally I don’t like Doyle’s Holmes. I think it’s too theoretically, and mostly involves brain and intelligence, rather than empathy. But The Hound of Baskervilles has caught my interest because of its grim theme, and so I decided to read it after all. In the end I quite enjoyed it; the grim mystery and the thrilling action were entertaining. But when it came to the investigation, I wasn’t impressed. And I disliked the writing style, making it as Watson’s journal, and thus reducing the sense of being present inside the scene. Watson’s explanation of the mystery also becomes anticlimax; it feels more like reading a newspaper, rather than a mystery/detective story.

For all that…. Three stars for The Hound of the Baskervilles.

~~~~~~~~~

I read from The Complete Sherlock Holmes hardback edition

This book is counted as:

72^nd book for The Classics Club Project

71st book for 1001 Books You Must Read Before You Die

The Last of the Mohicans

Thanks to Cooper’s The Last of the Mohicans, I learned for the first time in my life, the French-Indian war which took place in North America in 18^th century. In this war, British America (colony of Great Britain) and New France (colony of France) fought for trades and colonies along the American frontiers. As New France armies were outnumbered, they sought helps from the native Indian tribes.

General Munro and his armies were in Fort William Henry, when Cora and Alice—Munro’s daughters—travelled there in great danger to meet their father. They were escorted by Major Duncan Heyward, a respectable leader in the Royal Army, who was also falling in love with young Alice. As there was a risk of being ambushed by native Indians, or by the French armies who were on the way to take William Henry Fort from Munro, they recruited an Indian guide, Magua—from Huron tribe. On the way they met a white scout, Hawk-Eye, with his Indian companions Chingachgook and his son Uncas, the only survival of once great Mohican tribe. They warned Heyward that a Huron is not trustworthy, and Magua will mislead them. Magua escaped, so then Hawkeye and the Mohicans escorted Heyward and the two ladies, accompanied also by a psalm-singer called David Gamut.

After that, Cooper took us for an exciting adventure through the wild forest, meeting the Indian natives, fought them, and even visited their encampment. All of these, they went through in great danger. Many times Hawkeye and the Mohicans saved them from being scalped, and they even rescued their British friends when the Hurons captured them. Magua wanted to take revenge to Munro by forcing Cora to be his wife. Later on when Munro was forced to surrender the fort, and the armies were on the leave, the Hurons massacred many of them. In the chaos, Magua captured Cora for the second time, together with Alice and David. Now Munro, Heyward, Hawk-Eye, Chingachgook, and Uncas must race against time to rescue them. In the end, it would be a battle between the Delawares (from where the Mohicans came from) and Huron tribe.

The Last of the Mohicans is about the relationship between the whites and the natives, as well as between the native tribes themselves. If we traced down the history—and it was mentioned in the book—the main cause of it all is white people’s colonialism and their bad influences over the natives. Hawk-Eye told Heyward that the Delaware tribes (contained of six nations) were brothers on the beginning, until the Dutch traders landed on 1609, and introduced them to alcoholic drinks. The ‘poison’ brought to separation and disunity. And, like all colonialism and greediness of the conquerors, the natives who owned the land were expelled from their territory, to make place for the colonialists. Later on (not in this novel, though), the American even deliberately brought the Indians into destruction by their continual genocides act (American Indian Holocaust).

However, among the hatred and battles, sweet relationship could spring of the natives and the whites. The bond between Hawk-Eye and both Chingachgook and Uncas was very close; even closer, perhaps, than blood brothers. Although implicitly, we can also see that Uncas and Cora were attracted to each other. *spoiler alert* Interestingly, though, Cooper killed both youth before they even expressed their love to each other. Maybe Cooper just thought that their love was too impossible? *spoiler end*

I loved this book, although Cooper is rather spendthrift with words—like Mark Twain said (Twain re-write The Last of the Mohicans, and found that Cooper has ‘used 100 extra and unnecessary words in the original version’). I enjoyed the fast-paced adventure, the thrill of the Indian’s whoop which precede battles, and the funny moments when Hawk-Eye disguised as bear; but especially I loved to follow the calm and dignified attitude of Uncas and his father in any condition.

I am always sad everytime I read about Indian vs white people; because it reminds me how evil and egoist men are towards their brothers. How ironical it is, that they who profess to be Christian, could act so very unchristian, while the natives are much Christian than them. This book also reminds me that colonialism will always exist—in different shape maybe—but it will always be there, as long as the stronger keep oppressing the weaker; just like what Tamenund said in the ending: “The palefaces are masters of the earth, and the time of the Red Men has not yet come again.”

Five stars for The Last of the Mohicans!

~~~~~~~~~~

I read the Penguin Popular Classics paperback edition

This book is counted as:

4^th book for Back To The Classics 2014 (A Wartime Classic)

^70th book for 1001 Books You Must Read Before You Die

2^nd book for Historical Fiction Challenge (for 2014)

71^st book for The Classics Club Project