Reading Letter 18 – Band of Brothers

I can’t believe it is my last reading letter ever, my seventy-second letter since freshman year! I finished reading Band of Brothers and I really enjoyed it. It was a nice book to wind down on.

I looked up Ambrose’s plagiarism controversy and it was for a different book. He had apparently put footnotes indicating where the passage came from but didn’t formally put it in quotations. I understand that it was technically plagiarism and that the quotes should have been there, but at the same time he didn’t try to hid the fact that it was from someone else’s work because he gave credit in a footnote. Ambrose’s defense after apologizing was that he isn’t trying to discuss documents in his books, he is only trying to tell the story and he just goes with what works to make the story compelling. I think that if he had been writing a serious historical book or a dissertation it would have been worth all of the fuss. However, Ambrose is really just trying to make a story that is interesting and appeals to the reader so I think as long as he made note of his source in the footnote someone could have just pointed out his quotation error instead of starting a whole “scandal.”

I enjoyed both the book and the miniseries, however I think watching the miniseries makes the book more enjoyable and the scenes more vivid. Having seen the miniseries you can put faces with names and pictures with scenes. It makes the book more interesting. The book does a wonderful job at illustrating the men and their personalities, however I could see how all of the military abbreviations could be extremely confusing to someone who has no prior knowledge of it. In the mini series you can see when they are talking about the CP (command post) they are often going to or at a place with a bunch of people who are clearly in command. As far as understanding the military jargon I think the HBO series is easier than the book. I think the book would have been more confusing and less enjoyable to me if I had not already been familiar with ranks, jargon, etc from being around my sister. That is to me the only real failure (if you can really call it that) of Ambrose’s. To a reader not familiar with the military already the story would get lost while trying to decipher all of the abbreviations and such.

I have really enjoyed the honors program at McGehee. Without it I don’t think I would have made time to read on my own just because I wouldn’t really stop to think about it or make the extra effort to go out to Barnes and Noble to get books. It is also nice to have reading letters because you can have a dialogue with someone about what you are reading and say your opinion and if you are/aren’t enjoying a book and why. As far as having a dialogue I think the blog format is the best. When we were still turning reading letters in on paper we would have to go dig through our folders to find feedback or comments and then you only had space to write in the margins. With the blogs it is much easier to access feedback from home on continue talking about the book if you want to.

Overall I have enjoyed the honors program a lot and even though it can sometimes be stressful or a time crunch; overall it is enjoyable and made me stop to read for a little bit every day, something I probably wouldn’t have done otherwise. It also forced me to explore new genres, authors, and books, some of which I was not at all familiar with before. I think that in addition to finding new books the program helps you learn how to talk about literature, express your ideas, and helps you be a person who is “accomplished” (P&P reference!!) and aware of literature and the literary scene.

Work Cited

Ambrose, Stephen E. Band of Brothers: E Company, 506th Regiment, 101st Airborne from Normandy to Hitler’s Eagle’s Nest. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2001. Print.

« Reading Letter 17 — Band of Brothers

Reading Letter 17 — Band of Brothers

I have to start by staying that out of all of the history I have ever come across, World War Two is my favorite chunk. Not that I think it’s awesome that all of that– holocaust, atom bomb, etc– happened or that I would ever want it to happen again because it is really sad and terrible, but it is such an interesting time period. I mean the events and conditions that allowed Hitler to come to power are interesting in and of themselves as well as all of the different operations and the scale of the entire war are fascinating because it was like a “perfect storm” that allowed them to all come together. One example: if Einstein hadn’t have left Germany they would have probably had the nuclear weapons and not us. I am also fascinated with this part of history because it really defined a whole generation and involved everyone, not just the people on the front. Today it is pretty easy to forget that we are fighting a war but then, everyone was a part of it and everyone gave up something for it. I also like World War Two because it is really the only war in recent history where we were really doing something that mattered. Since then we have just been sticking our noses into civil wars and making everyone angry but in World War Two we were a part of something really worthwhile that mattered to people all across the globe. Anyway, I started reading Band of Brothers as be final honors book.

It follows the journey of Easy Company (E Company) of the 506 Regiment, 1^st Battalion, 101 Airborne Division from D-Day to VE-Day (victory in Europe). Usually I prefer to read a book before I see a movie version but for this book I have to say I am really happy to have already watched the HBO mini-series a couple times. It makes the story more personal because it allows you to put faces of the actual people with their names in the book, and while you are reading you can pick up on things that happen and connect them to the oral histories and stories the actual men gave which are included at the end of each series episode. I think it ads another layer to the story which is really nice and makes the book come alive more than it would if you had read it without also having seen it.

We just finished World War Two in history (perfect timing!) and I can see why George Orwell created Minitruth in 1984. Changing and/or suppressing of news was not at all limited to the Soviet Union during the war effort. The allies also suppressed events in the name of keeping up morale. In the big dress rehearsal for D-Day in Britain, german U-boats sank one of the troop carrier ships and over 900 men died during the dry practice run as a result. I found out in reading the book that the allies suppressed this until after the war because they didn’t want morale to drop or soldiers to loose faith in the operation.

One of the most impressive people in the book, in my opinion, is Dick Winters. He started as a lieutenant with Easy Company but by the end of the war he had earned the rank of major. He is also just a pretty amazing person. He gained the respect of all of the men in Easy but is always humble about it. One thing I liked about the HBO series that the book hasn’t had so far is the information they put at the end of each episode. During one scene the attack to capture 3 machine gun posts is detailed and, had I never seen the HBO series, I wouldn’t know why that attack was special in any way. The approach Winters instructed his men to take was not typical, however it was so effective that it is now taught standard at West Point. Winters isn’t the only really impressive guy in the company but he is a good example of the kind of men that were a part of Easy Company.

From what I can tell by comparing the book to the oral histories I have watched of the guys in E company, Ambrose has done a very good job of being faithful to the experience they had, and he has been really good at conveying the mood and tone of their story from the goofy bits to the very chilling parts as well.

I really can’t wait to finish this book. I want to see if the HBO series stays as true to the book (and therefore the actual story) as it has been thus far and I am also interested in reading and learning about all of the parts that just couldn’t be fit into the HBO version. I really can’t think of a better company to have their story documented, I mean they were on the front from the start of Operation Overlord (aka “D-Day”) to the very end of the war; they were the guys who held the line at the famous Battle of the Bulge, they liberated a concentration camp, they took Hitler’s Eagle’s nest. They were literally involved in just about everything which makes it all the more interesting to read about their story because it allows you to follow and connect with the same characters while still seeing all aspects of the war throughout the entire span of US involvement.

Needless to say I am really excited to finish the book and then go watch the HBO mini-series yet again!

Work Cited

Ambrose, Stephen E. Band of Brothers: E Company, 506th Regiment, 101st Airborne from Normandy to Hitler’s Eagle’s Nest. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2001. Print.

Reading Letter 18 – Band of Brothers »« God Bless You Mr. Rosewater — Reading Letter 16

God Bless You Mr. Rosewater — Reading Letter 16

I have just finished reading God Bless You Mr. Rosewater and enjoyed it very much. Vonnegut is obviously satirizing greed throughout the book but one part reminded me of his recurring theme of World War Two. When he goes into depth about the family history he says that Elliot Rosewater’s great grandfather (I think it is great grandfather) swindled his way to controlling the entire family fortune by misguiding his brother while his brother was out risking his life in a war. This is not only an obvious comment on greed in our society but also reminds me of all of the greedy people who treated World War Two as a get rich quick scheme while literally thousands of people were dying every day. It reminds me specifically of the movie “Inside Man” where the old, rich bank-owner’s past comes back to haunt him because he got rich doing business with the Nazi’s and selling people out to them, even friends.

I also found interesting the way he portrayed Elliot and Fred Rosewater. Elliot has money and doesn’t care about money, whereas Fred is on a budget and can’t stop thinking about money and how it relates to his status. Between Fred’s newfound pride in his apparently noble family tree and his wife’s obsessive behavior over making superficial things perfect to avoid looking “poor” I can’t stop thinking about trust fund babies of families that have historically done very well but are just scraping by while still trying to uphold a superficial facade. Fred’s wife complains about not having money to go out to lunch and buy things with, yet she never once suggests getting a job or helping in some way to bring in some money. It makes me think that Vonnegut satirizing people’s superficial pride and how shallow they can be in addition to greed. The way Fred’s wife if portrayed in particular makes it seem like the entire American middle class needs a reality check because compared to the rest of the world they have it pretty well.

Vonnegut connects this book with his other works and at the end Kilgore Trout actually shows up as a live character. I think it would have been really cool if instead of the car salesman going insane because of Trout in Breakfast of Champions, Vonnegut had made that character Elliot Rosewater, especially since Elliot seems to be good natured but a little loony and his sanity is in question. I just think that would have been a neat connections, but then again it could make the books seem like they were intended to be a sequel or something which could take away from the “ah hah” moment when you realize that Vonnegut is interconnecting his stories.

Several times the issue of Elliot loving everyone in the world came up. His father feels that since he “loves” everyone he really doesn’t love anyone. I have definitely heard the saying “trusting everyone is the same as trusting no one” and I think that there can be a lot of truth to that. It’s not easy to figure out who you can really trust of count on so it is much easier trust everyone. Not only do you not have to make any choices, you don’t have to worry about ever being let down or hurt by anyone. So to me, Elliot’s philosophy of loving everyone is kind of a copout for the difficult task of figuring out which people really care about you and opening your self up to other people and risking getting hurt.

I have really enjoyed reading Vonnegut this year. I am also really happy to have ended my Vonnegut readings with this book because it just about every book I have read by him this year which gave my the opportunity to refresh my memory and remember all of those stories. It was a really nice way to wrap up Vonnegut and I think this book, along with Slaughterhouse-Five are my favorite Vonnegut books.

Vonnegut, Kurt. God Bless You, Mr. Rosewater, Or, Pearls before Swine. New York: Dial Trade Paperbacks, 2006. Print.

Reading Letter 17 — Band of Brothers »« God Bless You Mr. Rosewater – Reading Letter 15

God Bless You Mr. Rosewater – Reading Letter 15

I have started reading my last Vonnegut book of the year, God Bless You Mr. Rosewater. So far I am really enjoying it. It is written much more like a novel than Breakfast of Champions is and I find it easier to follow, more similar to they way Slaughterhouse Five is written in the non-alien parts.

I am not sure if Vonnegut references his other works often in his books but having read several of his other works by this point I am noticing that he makes references to Kilgore Trout and the World of Tralfamadore. I really like that he ties his other works into the book because it makes the world of the Rosewaters seem more real because as a reader I know what the different things he is making reference to are which makes it seem more rich without him having to explain what everything is. It’s kind of like a reward to reading his books: the more you read by him, the deeper understanding and insight you an have into the world in his books.

I think Vonnegut is definitely using Mr. Rosewater to make a satire. I don’t think he is saying rich people are bad but rather that society on a whole can be really greedy. After all the person giving is Mr. Rosewater and the person trying to steal is the average Joe lawyer. I think satire comes in largely with Mr. Rosewater’s “insanity”. Everyone seems to think he has completely lost his marbles because he wants to hang out with everyday heros like firefighters and people who aren’t rich. I like Mr. Rosewater’s character so when Vonnegut paints him as insane for wanting to help others it reads as a commentary on how selfish people can be and how reluctant Americans can be toward helping each other out.

I also think it is important that Mr. Rosewater is from Indiana. His family is a rags to riches story and he is from the middle of America, not some upper crust New England family. Even though he is obviously very rich by making him from Indiana it brings him back into the realm of normal Americans and he is able to balance on the line between very rich, upper crust people, as well as you average, hard working American. If he was from a New England (or any place with a reputation of snobby rich people/ not middle America) it would be easier for the reader to dismiss him as a snobby, weird, rich guy and the reader wouldn’t like him as much. They may see him instead of being quirky and liking normal people as taking pity on them but still somehow thinking he is better than them.

Early on you start to see elements and references to World War Two in the book. The very start of the book says “The second World War was over…” which puts the time setting of the book in the late 40s. He also uses the phrase “Band of Brothers” which not only reminiscent of Steven Ambrose’s book about Easy Company in the 101^st Airborne but also brings to mind the quote by Henry V who said “We few, we happy few, we band of brothers, For he today who sheds his blood with me shall be my brother.” Elliot Rosewater also likes to spend time with infantrymen in addition to Firefighters which pulls war in once again. It is clear that his character admires the people who serve the country and serve others. This idea of appreciating soldiers is also seen in the town. The town has a plaque with the names of all the local service men who lost their lives serving their country. Between the town’s appreciation of their servicemen and Mr. Rosewater’s adoration of servicemen it seems as though Vonnegut wants his readers to  stop for a moment and think about and appreciate all of the people who serve our country.

I am really enjoying this book. I think God Bless You Mr. Rosewater is going to be one of my favorite Vonnegut books along with Slaughterhouse Five. I find them a little more straightforward and easier to follow while still being amusing and making an interesting and meaningful commentary.

Vonnegut, Kurt. God Bless You, Mr. Rosewater, Or, Pearls before Swine. New York: Dial Trade Paperbacks, 2006. Print.

God Bless You Mr. Rosewater — Reading Letter 16 »« Member of the Wedding – Letter 14 -

Member of the Wedding – Letter 14 -

I have just finished reading Carson McCullers’ Member of the Wedding. I enjoyed it for the most part but it isn’t one of my favorite books from this year. With all of our talking about Huck and whether he achieved his morals and such I noticed a similar trend with Frankie, although Frankie is dealing with maturity fitting in instead of morals. She is a pretty immature narrator and I think she is only partially successful in her journey. She does eventually find a friend in Mary Littlejohn and they go to the fair together and do girl things (132) but she doesn’t mature very much. She is very melodramatic and even towards the end of the book she is still threatening to kill her self. It just shows that she doesn’t have the maturity to understand the gravity of what she is threatening to do to herself and makes her seem very childish even though she thinks she has some newfound maturity. Her immaturity just seems less out of place at the end when she is dreaming up stories with Mary than when she is running around town telling all of her dreams to adults.

I also thought the whole part with the soldier was a bit odd. First of all I don’t understand how he would have not realized how young she was. Even if she appeared older at first when he actually talked to her it would have been apparent by her immaturity that she was not as old as he had thought. I also don’t understand why she didn’t just tell him how young she was when he invited her up to his room. It would have taken awkwardness off her and she wouldn’t have ended up hitting him on the head and knocking him out. That scene is also a pretty big showing of her immaturity. I makes complete sense for her to not want to kiss him and such but if she was mature at all she would have just said I don’t want to do this and/or left. The way she handled that situation was an obvious display of her immaturity.

Bernice’s character reminds me of The Help and the different maids who really care about the little white girls they are helping to raise. She strikes me as very caring and maybe even motherly when she warns Frankie about falling in love with an idea of a guy rather than the actual person. This does end up happening to Frankie, although with the wedding instead of a guy.

The wedding was also interesting. The title of the book talks about a wedding and Frankie is always building up for and talking about the wedding but the whole things seems really anti-climactic and disappointing (kind of like the end of Huck Finn!). I feel like the wedding itself is really not important to the book/story at all and it was just a convenient situation to present Frankie in as a growing girl trying to figure out where she belonged. The wedding could have easily been replaced with something else like a prom or some other over-hyped event what would have MuCullers with the same opportunity to create Frankie’s character.

I don’t think I would call Frankie a hero just because she seems equally immature at the beginning as at the end and she doesn’t really progress much as a character. For me the only thing that makes her seem like she has a hero cycle is that she does eventually win back the friendship of the girls who, in the beginning of the book, said she was too young to hang out with them. Aside from that she isn’t particularly successful in overcoming many other dragon battles or other things from the hero cycle.  I think it would have been interesting to see her interact with a boy her own age after a few months had gone by because then would would be able to look at her interactions and compare them with the ones she had with the soldier to see if she is any more mature in adult-like situations.

I enjoyed the book but it is definitely not one of my favorite books this year. It was a bit of a letdown at the end because her quest to be free from her dad and the town basically failed and between this book and Huck’s quest failing I would really like to read a book with an exciting and less disappointing ending next time!

Work Cited

McCullers, Carson. The Member of the Wedding. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1946. Print.

God Bless You Mr. Rosewater – Reading Letter 15 »« Member of the Wedding — Reading Letter 13

Member of the Wedding — Reading Letter 13

I have finished reading part one of Carson McCullers’ Member of the Wedding. The story follows a young girl, Frankie, who has found out her brother is visiting with his soon-to-be bride and that she will be traveling to go to the wedding. She talks through her thoughts and feelings with the family cook and also spends time playing with her cousin.

Frankie is an interesting character; she has a really strong desire to be a part of a group and belong with other people. It is apparent early on that this is a large part of what she is struggling with as her former friends now don’t want her around because they are teenagers and she is still in an awkward middle between being a teenager and a little kid. She also seems very conflicted about her brother getting married. She likes the idea of being a member of the wedding because it gives her a place in a group like she has clearly been looking for all summer. However, she also seems upset and angry that her brother won’t just be her brother anymore and will now be sidetracked from her. Given that she is so eager to belong I can see why she would be upset to be losing her only sibling to marriage because she probably views it as losing someone she naturally belonged with, her brother. If this is true it would help explain why she seems to be very moody and easily angered.

Frankie gets very angry and lashes out in sometimes startling ways. Most of the time they are things you would expect from a pre-teen girl, however at one point she threatens to throw a knife at Berenice which is extremely startling to me (30). After she throws the knife past Berenice she seems to try and play it off like she was totally in control and she knows exactly what she is doing which is interesting to be because it makes me think she realized how nuts and scary what she did was before she could stop herself and proves that she really has no impulse control. I have a feeling her lack of impulse control and her lashing out a people will end up causing problems for her as the story continues.

Frankie is also interesting because she is at an age where she is starting to be self-conscious about things like her height. She spends quite a bit of part one discussing her height and how she has calculated how tall she will be by the time she stops growing. I am curious as to what role her self-consciousness will play in the story. I like that McCullers makes her a bit self conscious because it makes her seem more real and relatable. If the narrator was a twelve year old who had it all figured out I don’t think the readers would believe the story much, nor would they likely find it interesting.

I think the choice of World War Two as the time period is also an interesting one. I think it lays a more casual stage between Berenice and Frankie, not only because Frankie is young but, because it seems as though people were less focused on racial prejudices during those years because they were all united around this one common event that effected all of their lives. There has also been a little bit of war imagery so far, and I am curious to see if it creates any sort of common theme.

Frankie is also bent on the idea of running away and getting away from her house, never to come back. I don’t think anything will really come of it and I have a feeling that the threats to leave are rooted in her issues of not belonging to a group and preferring to leave than face spending all of her time alone without and group to take part in.

I think it will be really interesting to see how all of these parts of her personality will come together and effect her different choices or ideas throughout the story. She is kind of similar to Huck in that she is on some sort of quest to leave home and be free, albeit for different reasons. I am looking forward to finishing this book and I will have plenty of time to read on the plane over Mardi Gras Break.

Work Cited

McCullers, Carson. The Member of the Wedding. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1946. Print.

Member of the Wedding – Letter 14 - »« The Stranger – Reading Letter 12

The Stranger – Reading Letter 12

I have just finished reading The Stranger by Albert Camus and I have to say I think it ended rather abruptly, although I also think I have a better understanding of existentialism than I did when I wrote my last letter. Although the end is kind of abrupt and doesn’t tie things up neatly Meursault does have an realization at the end where things all come together in his mind and he begins to understand his mother and the actions she made when she was getting ready to die. The debate over what is the meaning of life and if god exists are definitely addressed at the end of the book and Meursault comes to some sort of peace with his fate at the guillotine. He grapples with the fact that when you die the world just keeps on turning and eventually people forget and move on. I think people like to think that everything stops after they are gone because even though it is not reality it is comforting. Existentialism also addresses the different obstacle that a person has to overcome and for Meursault I think his obstacle is understanding people and their emotions. I think he achieves this at the vey end when he thinks about his mom and why she took another fiance as she was dying (116). I think facing his own death is ultimately what helps him understand life, or his at least.

I think the way things played out with Raymond is interesting as well. I mean Raymond is the one who actually had motive to kill the Arab, and his gun was used to do the killing, yet he got off scott-free and Meursault was sentenced to death instead. I think Camus could be criticizing the justice system and showing how inefficient it is because Raymond is the one who actually has a history of being violent whereas Meusault just has a history of not understanding people and their emotions. The story shows they way in which words and facts can be twisted to paint whatever picture you want, the same way the prosecutor twisted Meursaults awkwardness with other people and make him seem like a totally emotionless sociopath when really he probably has some disorder because he doesn’t seem to understand that what he did was not OK in the first place.

I think the end of the book in particular shows how powerful having hope can be. When Meursault is thinking about the guillotine and his death he talks about how even if there was the slightest chance of getting away and escaping his death sentence it would make him feel much better. Hope can be a very good think but is can also be paralyzing and leave someone stuck in one place, hoping for something that will never really happen. That said I think he would have used it as more of a comfort tool because on the last page he seems to accept his sentence totally and hopes that crowds of people are there to see his execution (117), although I am not sure I understand why he hopes they will be saying mean things.

I think this was a very good book, it was definitely a nice change of pace from all of the Sci-Fi books I have been reading this year and I enjoyed it a lot. I think it has an interesting message (or criticism) about life and the motions people go through everyday and how maybe we need to pay more attention to them and not take them for granted.

Work Cited

Camus, Albert. The Stranger. New York: Knopf, 1993. Print.

Member of the Wedding — Reading Letter 13 »« The Stranger – Reading Letter 11

The Stranger – Reading Letter 11

I have finished part one of The Stranger by Albert Camus. It took a little bit of getting used to shifting back from Vonnegut and sci-fi books to book which reads in a more traditional way with a fairly straightforward plot flow. I did a little bit of wikipedia searching and learned that many people consider Camus to be an existentialist. This made a lot of sense and made certain aspects of the plot seem less random.

The main character, Meursault, is very interesting to me. At first he seems to have a solid set of values and be a caring person who steers away from conflict, however he completely contradicts that by the end of part one. It is clear he cared about his mother and he wanted her to be happier with friends and well cared for, something he couldn’t do very well on his own; I understand why he put his mother in a home. He also seems to be very nice to his girlfriend but at the same time treats her in a very peculiar way. I think this and his murdering the Arab in the story were easier to understand once I read that Camus is connected with existentialism.

I understand existentialism to be an idea rooted in the individual person but also a movement which points out the absurdities in the world. Discovering this made his odd behavior make more sense. I almost feel like Camus is trying to say something about love and that it is absurd or silly and not really worth all the hype. On several occasions Marie asks Meursault if he loves her and he is very indifferent and just tells her that he probably doesn’t (34). I thought this was very peculiar because from his actions and the thoughts he narrates about her it seems like he is basically in love or at least cares about her and likes her very, very much. Which brings be to wonder if he is trying to say love is absurd or something of the like. Meursault’s actions combined with the fight that goes on in the apartment upstairs, when Raymond beats his girlfriend, really makes me think that Camus is saying something intentionally about love being bad or at least a waste of time.

I think it is curious how Camus identifies the the men who are after Raymond as “Arab”, just arab, no names. Most of the characters that Meursault comes into contact with are given actual names, but these characters are just called Arab, even the main Arab character, the one he murder’s, isn’t given a name. I don’t necessarily think it is a racist thing but I do think the names of the Arabs were omitted intentionally. Connecting it back to my understanding of existentialism they may not have names because it makes their murder seem even more absurd and random. By not giving them names it is obvious that Meursault, the narrator, doesn’t now them and since they were after Raymond and not him he really doesn’t have any issue of his own with them, much less an issue worth murdering for. I think it is also important that Meursault murdered the Arab instead of Raymond murdering him. Since Meursault didn’t have any apparent issue with them worth fighting over it makes murder seem ridiculous, whereas if Raymond had murdered the Arab it would come off as less of a comment on the absurdity of murder and more understandable as revenge for slicing his face open.

I am curious to see where this abrupt shift from conflict avoiding guy to murderer will lead in part two and I am also curious to see how his relationship/love affair with Marie will pan out with him being a murderer and also with his apparent lack of interest in love and relationships.

On a separate note, one thing I have enjoyed about this book which is basically irrelevant to its analysis is that many of the cities are also street names from the section of St. Charles were the streets are named for the different napoleonic wars. It is just something I noticed which I think is kind of nifty.

Work Cited

Camus, Albert. The Stranger. New York: Knopf, 1993. Print.

The Stranger – Reading Letter 12 »« Left Hand Of Darkness – Reading Letter 10

Left Hand Of Darkness – Reading Letter 10

I have just finished reading The Left Hand of Darkness by Ursula LeGuin. Ai travels all over their world and becomes good friends and, almost like lovers with Therem, who had ben banished at the start of the book.

It is science fiction but I found it interesting that she made references to the society and structure we are accustomed to and that she still used our laws of physics in her imagined world.

The structure of the book was similar to what I had originally thought but did not have local tales as frequently as I originally guessed. He meets a group of fortunetellers in the first part of the story and become friends with Faxe. This becomes important at the end of the book because Faxe’s character returns and you see that he has taken a political office and is in a position to help Ai achieve his goals of having the planet join all of the other united intelligent life.

Therem and Ai’s relationship develops in an interesting way, especially on their trip over the ice, returning to Karhide (Chapters 18-19). Ai realizes fully that Therem is a man and a woman at the same time. This is significant for him because he has never encountered that before in all his planet hopping, and with this realization and acceptance they build an oddly romantic relationship. They are not physically sexual with one another but they have a special and intimate connection in just about every other way. Their relationship and sharing of secrets serves as a vehicle for LeGuin to write about the sexes and customs for relationships. They are neither men nor women, but both at the same time and their customs are extremely different from ours as you learn, and later meet, the son of Therem and his brother (300).

I really think this book is more fantasy than sci-fi. It is just so far removed from reality and everything the reader knows and experiences that it just seems like everything is made up and it is not meant to be based in science or reality at all. Granted, she does refer to earthlings and spaceships and other things we are familiar with but with her inclusion of telepathy in their society she removes the reader from even being a part of Ai’s world. I think it would be possible to call it sci-fi of she had left out the telepathy because then it would be more believable that it was really a person from our world, that we can relate to, going out exploring and learning about other far-away worlds. If that was the case I would be able to consider it sci-fi more easily because it is possible that 500 years from now we will be sending people out into space to visit other inhabited planets and make alliances.

Over all though I did enjoy reading this book very much and I am glad to have read it. It will give me some other “sci-fi” to compare the similar elements of Vonnegut’s work to as I continue to read his books through the end of the year. I prefer Vonnegut’s sci-fi to LeGuin, partly because it is more humorous, but also because it has some element of human life or our world that we can actually relate to or understand through our actual experiences.

Work Cited

LeGuin, Ursula K. The Left Hand of Darkness. New York: Ace, 1976. Print.

The Stranger – Reading Letter 11 »« The Left Hand of Darkness – Reading Letter 9

The Left Hand of Darkness – Reading Letter 9

I have recently started reading The Left Hand of Darkness by Ursula LeGuin. The main character and narrator is an earthling who has gone to another planet to convince them join the rest of intelligent life in their “kingdom” (I’m not really sure what else to call it).

The society on the planet is similar to ours in many ways but also distinctly different. The current year is always year one but the years before and after change each new years. I get that this system emphasizes the present but it just seems silly, I mean they basically name years the same way they do on earth and forget about the real name when the year arrives. Also similar to earth is their king and his court. He is getting help from Lord Estraven in his attempt to persuade and win over their king but early on is seems as though Estraven has done something to lose favor with the king because he keeps telling Mr. Ai that he can no longer put in a good word for him (14). The society is very similar to ours and I think it may end up being used to make a statement about our own society and the way we do things.

LeGuin acknowledges “earth” and our science when she discusses the name of the planet. Before an earthling went there and discovered the real name from its inhabitants it had been called winter because of its extremely cold climate. They have myths or folk tales like we do, one of which revolves around a blizzard. Two brother kings vow not to separate and when they are forced to one kills himself. The other ends up alone crawling on a glacier and in the middle (I’m guessing the “eye”) of the blizzard he sees his dead brother who tells him that people who commit suicide stay in the center of blizzards (25). The book seems to have a long chapter followed by a short chapter and I wonder if the structure isn’t one chapter about Mr. Ai on the planet followed by one of the stories of their culture.

The book is considered science fiction but whenever I think of science fiction I think of stories like House of the Scorpion where the stories are set in a realistic and familiar world where weird and impossible things happen. I always think of books with aliens as their completely separate genre or just complete fiction without the science part. I guess when I think science fiction I associate that with at least some part being realistic and believable instead of the entire thing being set in a fictional universe. However they do make reference to earth and acknowledge that the narrator is an earthling so I guess that counts as the somewhat realistic and believable part.

Even though they both deal with aliens I don’t find much in common with Vonnegut other than the fact that this book is narrated from the point of view of an outsider to the world being observed as in Breakfast of Champions. I realize now I am reading this book, that I have associated Vonnegut’s use of aliens and other universes as a tool with which he furthers his satire rather than an element of science fiction in his books.

I am interested in the story and I am curious to continue reading and see where it goes. I think I will be prone to possibly put meaning where there isn’t any since I have become accustomed to Vonnegut and looking for his satire in just about everything. Hopefully this book will be a nice change of pace.

Work Cited

LeGuin, Ursula K. The Left Hand of Darkness. New York: Ace, 1976. Print.

Left Hand Of Darkness – Reading Letter 10 »« Breakfast of Champions – Letter 8