Thursday, February 20, 2014
Darryl Says...
... Despite reading some every day, I am only on page 20. The writing is very dense, and I find myself reading very slowly. Also, I did not have the book with me for the recent down time at the Honda dealership.
Week One of Love in the Time of Cholera
Welcome to Thursday! Today starts week two of our group read of Love in the Time of Cholera. Folks should be somewhere near page 100.
I am, of course, running behind as usual. I'm at page 38.
My first problem was the appearance of the person in the car with dessert (hopefully that's abstract enough not to be a reveal for those behind me) whose name caused me quite a lot of confusion. I had to flip back to the beginning of the book, and reread a few pages, to clear up my own confusion.
Here's something I know now, that I did not know before: In Spanish, one does not have a "last name", rather one has an "apellido", or surname, comprised of a first apellido and a second apellido. The first apellido is taken from the first apellido of the father, the second apellido is taken from the first apellido of the mother.
According to Wikipedia, Gabriel's parents were Gabriel Eligio García and Luisa Santiaga Márquez. Huh? shouldn't his name then have been Gabriel Eligio Santiaga?
Well, his mothers full name was Luisa Santiaga Márquez Iguarán. In practice, only the first apellido is used for most purposes, the full apellido is used for legal proceedings and the like, so her name would be bandied about as Luisa Santiaga Márquez, omitting the Iguarán, just as it reads on Wikipedia. His father's name is similarly said as Gabriel Eligio García, omitting his second apellido.
When Gabriel married Mercedes Barcha Pardo in 1958, I assume she took his paternal apellido (Mercedes Barcha Garcia, that would be, replacing her Mother's first apellido of Pardo, with Gabriel's paternal apellido). She is named around the intarwebs as Mercedes Barcha, consistent with using only the first apellido in normal use, and she is also named as Mercedes Barcha Garcia, and, oddly, Mercedes Barcha Garcia Marquez, which may be the anglicizing thing popping up again, taking "Garcia Marques" to be his "last name" and replacing the Pardo with it, as though Pardo were her last name.
Anyway, that is why Gabriel Garcia Marquez is found in the G's at Half Price Books, not in the M's as our english and german naming conventions would suggest. Interestingly, in Spain, the parents of a child may now legally reverse the mother and father first apellidos for their children if they wish, thanks to new gender equality laws.
There are all kinds of cool implications about identity management, sort orders, mailing lists, and such, for correctly handling Spanish surnames. My bet is most U.S. organizations get it wrong, particularly when accent marks and that pesky space between the first and second apellido needs to be stored.
I am, of course, running behind as usual. I'm at page 38.
My first problem was the appearance of the person in the car with dessert (hopefully that's abstract enough not to be a reveal for those behind me) whose name caused me quite a lot of confusion. I had to flip back to the beginning of the book, and reread a few pages, to clear up my own confusion.
Here's something I know now, that I did not know before: In Spanish, one does not have a "last name", rather one has an "apellido", or surname, comprised of a first apellido and a second apellido. The first apellido is taken from the first apellido of the father, the second apellido is taken from the first apellido of the mother.
According to Wikipedia, Gabriel's parents were Gabriel Eligio García and Luisa Santiaga Márquez. Huh? shouldn't his name then have been Gabriel Eligio Santiaga?
Well, his mothers full name was Luisa Santiaga Márquez Iguarán. In practice, only the first apellido is used for most purposes, the full apellido is used for legal proceedings and the like, so her name would be bandied about as Luisa Santiaga Márquez, omitting the Iguarán, just as it reads on Wikipedia. His father's name is similarly said as Gabriel Eligio García, omitting his second apellido.
When Gabriel married Mercedes Barcha Pardo in 1958, I assume she took his paternal apellido (Mercedes Barcha Garcia, that would be, replacing her Mother's first apellido of Pardo, with Gabriel's paternal apellido). She is named around the intarwebs as Mercedes Barcha, consistent with using only the first apellido in normal use, and she is also named as Mercedes Barcha Garcia, and, oddly, Mercedes Barcha Garcia Marquez, which may be the anglicizing thing popping up again, taking "Garcia Marques" to be his "last name" and replacing the Pardo with it, as though Pardo were her last name.
Anyway, that is why Gabriel Garcia Marquez is found in the G's at Half Price Books, not in the M's as our english and german naming conventions would suggest. Interestingly, in Spain, the parents of a child may now legally reverse the mother and father first apellidos for their children if they wish, thanks to new gender equality laws.
There are all kinds of cool implications about identity management, sort orders, mailing lists, and such, for correctly handling Spanish surnames. My bet is most U.S. organizations get it wrong, particularly when accent marks and that pesky space between the first and second apellido needs to be stored.
Mary Says...
I am on page 114 of our new selection and enjoying it very much. Started out slow, had to reread a few pages to get the names in my head. I like the story line and feel as though I know the people in the book. You can feel the depth of passion and love.
Tuesday, February 18, 2014
What other book clubs have been reading
I was doing a little web browsing this afternoon, while thinking about the recent changes I made to the What's Next page, and thinking about an email Susanna sent yesterday about Garcia Marquez.
First, she pointed out that "Love in the Time of Cholera" is on the Oprah's Book Club list, as is "Hundred Years of Solitude", both of which quite surprised me. When I think of Oprah's list, I think of the Franzen "kerfuffle", and James Frey, I suppose because those are the books and authors that got sensationalized air time on whatever media I was into back then. I was also leery of what I feared would be books that made the best sellers' lists not on their own merits, but on the strength of an Oprah endorsement, which is backward thinking really as Oprah would presumably not select a book that didn't have sufficient merit to belong on a best seller list anyway, right?
I figured Toni Morrison and Maya Angelou would be there, for their influential works in womens' and race issues, and yes they are both there. I did not expect Leo Tolstoy or Charles Dickens, as I thought of the Oprah list as containing only contemporary works, not canonical classics. I also found it interesting that Steinbeck and Faulkner are both represented on her list.
Well, you learn something every day if you aren't careful.
The second thing Susanna commented on is Garcia Marquez is suffering from Alzheimer's, and has since mid-2012. He will turn 87 next month. Looking at his bibliography, the publishing dates stop around 2004, with new translations appearing in 2005.
The Oprah's club thing got me thinking about what other book clubs have been reading. The site from which I get the review questions, LitLovers, has a list of top 50 "most popular books on LitLovers" though I note the date last updated says January 20th, 2013. I wonder if that's a typo.
I also found this list, with books arranged by genre or other category, which might have some interesting choices to offer.
I invite everyone to check out these lists, and see if anything sparks an interest.
First, she pointed out that "Love in the Time of Cholera" is on the Oprah's Book Club list, as is "Hundred Years of Solitude", both of which quite surprised me. When I think of Oprah's list, I think of the Franzen "kerfuffle", and James Frey, I suppose because those are the books and authors that got sensationalized air time on whatever media I was into back then. I was also leery of what I feared would be books that made the best sellers' lists not on their own merits, but on the strength of an Oprah endorsement, which is backward thinking really as Oprah would presumably not select a book that didn't have sufficient merit to belong on a best seller list anyway, right?
I figured Toni Morrison and Maya Angelou would be there, for their influential works in womens' and race issues, and yes they are both there. I did not expect Leo Tolstoy or Charles Dickens, as I thought of the Oprah list as containing only contemporary works, not canonical classics. I also found it interesting that Steinbeck and Faulkner are both represented on her list.
Well, you learn something every day if you aren't careful.
The second thing Susanna commented on is Garcia Marquez is suffering from Alzheimer's, and has since mid-2012. He will turn 87 next month. Looking at his bibliography, the publishing dates stop around 2004, with new translations appearing in 2005.
The Oprah's club thing got me thinking about what other book clubs have been reading. The site from which I get the review questions, LitLovers, has a list of top 50 "most popular books on LitLovers" though I note the date last updated says January 20th, 2013. I wonder if that's a typo.
I also found this list, with books arranged by genre or other category, which might have some interesting choices to offer.
I invite everyone to check out these lists, and see if anything sparks an interest.
Friday, February 14, 2014
Once and Future King, concluded
Congratulations to everyone, for attempting Once and Future King.
We held our discussion on 13 Feb 2014, as planned. At that time, four members had finished the book, all within a day of the discussion.
Most of our group found the novel very challenging, for a variety of reasons. The vocabulary was a big challenge, with quite a few members commenting they either kept a dictionary handy or simply glossed over words they didn't know.
Quite a few members felt the pacing of the story was too slow, with excessive descriptions of the environment that didn't seem to advance the story or serve any other purpose.
Pretty much everyone felt the romance between Lancelot and Guenever was very under-represented in the novel.
We went through the LitLover's questions (they can be seen on the Past Selections page) and discussed about half of them.
The fantasy genre overall is not a primary reading interest for the majority of our group, and we will probably steer clear of this genre going forward.
The media choice seemed pretty evenly split for this novel, with about half of us reading a paperback, and about half reading on an e-reader. I noted with some interest, that of the 4 that finished the book, two were reading a mass market paperback (the "normal" sized paperback) with fairly small print. The print size was an issue for some of the folks reading the mass market paperback editions. One of our finishers (myself) was reading a trade paperback edition (thank you Suzanne!) with larger print that was easier on the eyes. The other finisher read an e-book edition.
At the time of the meeting, there were 7 titles suggested for the next read. We selected "Love in the Time of Cholera", by Gabriel Garcia Marquez. I have updated the Current Selection and What's Next pages to reflect that selection.
Some members had suggestions for authors they particularly like, and I have asked those members to be sure and send me titles and authors that I can add to the What's Next list.
I really enjoyed the discussion, and having everyone over! I hope everyone else enjoyed it as well.
If anyone has suggestions or comments that would improve your enjoyment of the club, or of the discussion meetings, please shoot me an email or post a comment.
We held our discussion on 13 Feb 2014, as planned. At that time, four members had finished the book, all within a day of the discussion.
Most of our group found the novel very challenging, for a variety of reasons. The vocabulary was a big challenge, with quite a few members commenting they either kept a dictionary handy or simply glossed over words they didn't know.
Quite a few members felt the pacing of the story was too slow, with excessive descriptions of the environment that didn't seem to advance the story or serve any other purpose.
Pretty much everyone felt the romance between Lancelot and Guenever was very under-represented in the novel.
We went through the LitLover's questions (they can be seen on the Past Selections page) and discussed about half of them.
The fantasy genre overall is not a primary reading interest for the majority of our group, and we will probably steer clear of this genre going forward.
The media choice seemed pretty evenly split for this novel, with about half of us reading a paperback, and about half reading on an e-reader. I noted with some interest, that of the 4 that finished the book, two were reading a mass market paperback (the "normal" sized paperback) with fairly small print. The print size was an issue for some of the folks reading the mass market paperback editions. One of our finishers (myself) was reading a trade paperback edition (thank you Suzanne!) with larger print that was easier on the eyes. The other finisher read an e-book edition.
At the time of the meeting, there were 7 titles suggested for the next read. We selected "Love in the Time of Cholera", by Gabriel Garcia Marquez. I have updated the Current Selection and What's Next pages to reflect that selection.
Some members had suggestions for authors they particularly like, and I have asked those members to be sure and send me titles and authors that I can add to the What's Next list.
I really enjoyed the discussion, and having everyone over! I hope everyone else enjoyed it as well.
If anyone has suggestions or comments that would improve your enjoyment of the club, or of the discussion meetings, please shoot me an email or post a comment.
Wednesday, February 12, 2014
Finished reading Once and Future King
I have finished Once and Future King.
It seems White saved all the evil for the final short installment of his telling. Here we have everyone's sordid past trotted out for all to see. Here Arthur is forced by the same mechanisms he believed would save his idyllic Camelot, to instead lose his ability to remain innocent of Lancelot and Guenever. Here we see Mordred engaged in his treachery, and hear something of the back story to Arthur's "original sin", sending boatloads of innocent babies to their deaths in a vain attempt to avoid a prophesy.
I am very much looking forward to seeing everyone Thursday evening.
It seems White saved all the evil for the final short installment of his telling. Here we have everyone's sordid past trotted out for all to see. Here Arthur is forced by the same mechanisms he believed would save his idyllic Camelot, to instead lose his ability to remain innocent of Lancelot and Guenever. Here we see Mordred engaged in his treachery, and hear something of the back story to Arthur's "original sin", sending boatloads of innocent babies to their deaths in a vain attempt to avoid a prophesy.
I am very much looking forward to seeing everyone Thursday evening.
Tuesday, February 11, 2014
Final Stretch
I have finished the 3rd book, and am getting ready to start the fourth book tonight. We are scheduled to meet at my house this Thursday the 13th, at 7:00 PM to discuss the book.
I look forward to having everyone over, and I hope everyone enjoys the discussion. Many of us have confided to me that they find this book a really difficult read, for various reasons. I have a short list of titles I'm interested in, on the what's next page of the blog, but so far I have had no suggestions from anyone else. I would prefer to hear suggestions before Thursday, so we have time to consider whatever titles others may care to suggest.
I continue find the book quite enjoyable, for its overall light tone and somewhat slapstick comedy. I see lots of humor throughout the book that would surely appeal to T H White's audience, if he intended his book to be read by teenage boys. The cultural references continue to escape me, unless I take time to look them up, but I think most of the humor should be understandable to our group.
I agree with what others have said about the uni-dimensional quality of the characters in the story, but I think that is intentional on White's part as opposed to a failure in technique. As I continue to read the story, my conviction that he expected his audience to be well-read and familiar with Malory and other tellings of the Arthurian legend remains strong. I think the characters are written to express the characteristic that most defines them:
Arthur is noble. Even as Wart, with one or two notable exceptions, Arthur shows the attributes of nobility.
Guenever is in love with two men, and is the apex of a love triangle. Her background is completely omitted other than casual references to her father, and one mention of arranged marriage.
Lancelot is conflicted between his love of an eternal God (and its associated expression as hero worship of Arthur), and his love of a fallible and mortal woman. Lancelot enjoys the additional attention from White, of his struggle to reconcile his strength as a knight which he ascribes to purity, and his betrayal of Arthur in his relationship with Guenever. He has nearly no struggle with his loss of virginity regarding Elaine, except to the extent he believed it was Guenever and therefore he had sinned against Arthur. I find it interesting how often Lancelot is the "Deus ex Machina" that arrives at the end of a situation to employ his great combat ability to resolve an otherwise lost situation.
Mordred is expressed by White as conceited and self-absorbed, but the sense of evil and treachery that is ascribed to Mordred in other sources is absent here (at least so far). White doesn't even include in his rendition, any episodes of Arthur with his half sister Morgause, he simply assumes everyone understands that Mordred is Arthur's illegitimate son from an incestuous relationship.
Galahad has no human qualities (in fact he is so mono-dimensional, White openly tells us Galahad has no human qualities, rather than letting us figure that out), he is portrayed as having only the divine quality of his purity. Galahad doesn't even seem to be tempted to sin, in White's telling.
Again, I look forward to the discussion on Thursday. We may have some finger foods but won't have dinner, so plan accordingly, and please bring whatever you prefer to drink.
Please check the list of suggested titles for our next read, send me any additions you'd like to see added, and think about what we might tackle next.
Until Thursday, stay safe and good reading!
I look forward to having everyone over, and I hope everyone enjoys the discussion. Many of us have confided to me that they find this book a really difficult read, for various reasons. I have a short list of titles I'm interested in, on the what's next page of the blog, but so far I have had no suggestions from anyone else. I would prefer to hear suggestions before Thursday, so we have time to consider whatever titles others may care to suggest.
I continue find the book quite enjoyable, for its overall light tone and somewhat slapstick comedy. I see lots of humor throughout the book that would surely appeal to T H White's audience, if he intended his book to be read by teenage boys. The cultural references continue to escape me, unless I take time to look them up, but I think most of the humor should be understandable to our group.
I agree with what others have said about the uni-dimensional quality of the characters in the story, but I think that is intentional on White's part as opposed to a failure in technique. As I continue to read the story, my conviction that he expected his audience to be well-read and familiar with Malory and other tellings of the Arthurian legend remains strong. I think the characters are written to express the characteristic that most defines them:
Arthur is noble. Even as Wart, with one or two notable exceptions, Arthur shows the attributes of nobility.
Guenever is in love with two men, and is the apex of a love triangle. Her background is completely omitted other than casual references to her father, and one mention of arranged marriage.
Lancelot is conflicted between his love of an eternal God (and its associated expression as hero worship of Arthur), and his love of a fallible and mortal woman. Lancelot enjoys the additional attention from White, of his struggle to reconcile his strength as a knight which he ascribes to purity, and his betrayal of Arthur in his relationship with Guenever. He has nearly no struggle with his loss of virginity regarding Elaine, except to the extent he believed it was Guenever and therefore he had sinned against Arthur. I find it interesting how often Lancelot is the "Deus ex Machina" that arrives at the end of a situation to employ his great combat ability to resolve an otherwise lost situation.
Mordred is expressed by White as conceited and self-absorbed, but the sense of evil and treachery that is ascribed to Mordred in other sources is absent here (at least so far). White doesn't even include in his rendition, any episodes of Arthur with his half sister Morgause, he simply assumes everyone understands that Mordred is Arthur's illegitimate son from an incestuous relationship.
Galahad has no human qualities (in fact he is so mono-dimensional, White openly tells us Galahad has no human qualities, rather than letting us figure that out), he is portrayed as having only the divine quality of his purity. Galahad doesn't even seem to be tempted to sin, in White's telling.
Again, I look forward to the discussion on Thursday. We may have some finger foods but won't have dinner, so plan accordingly, and please bring whatever you prefer to drink.
Please check the list of suggested titles for our next read, send me any additions you'd like to see added, and think about what we might tackle next.
Until Thursday, stay safe and good reading!
Wednesday, February 5, 2014
Darryl Says...
I have just finished chapter 16 in book three.
Book two was good, but IMO there was too much about the questing beast. Very Monthy Python-esque, and didn't really seem to belong. Am curious to see how others felt about this.
I am reserving judgement on book three, but thus far it seems the characters of Lancelot and Guinevere are very shallow. Intricate romance is not the author's forte. I am not surprised to hear rumors of his gayness. Still, the story has captured my interest and I will likely be finished before our meeting.
Sunday, February 2, 2014
Alice Says...
I feeling like I'm letting everyone, including myself down but I'm really behind on reading this wonderful book. I'm having a hard time getting through the details. I will continue but am not promising to finish it.
Susanna Says...
I am a little more then half way through. I enjoyed how the first book finished everything rather quickly. He started at a slow pace, with a lot of little stories that didn't seem to have any great import to the story but at the end of the first book he wrapped it up and brought it all together quite nicely.
Fourth Week
I have finished Liber Primus, and must say I was quite emotionally affected by the concluding events of the book. I was touched pretty strongly by the crowd of "friends" who helped Wart pull the sword from the stone, I had to take a break and dry my eyes. I particularly liked the juxtaposition between the first few attempts he made to pull the sword with brute strength, and the method with which he actually drew the sword, having heard the advice of the friends. I'm not sure whether the implication is that his friends granted him so much power that he was able to draw it so easily, or whether with the support of his friends he did not try to force the sword but just drew it "naturally".
Following that scene, and continuing my emotional instability I suppose, I laughed at the phrase "...but, as the Wart was prepared to go on putting the sword into the stone and pulling it out again until Doomsday...". I could so easily see the Wart at the stone and anvil, perfectly willing to put the sword in the stone for each person to try and extricate, then pulling it out for them. I imagine him offering to give the sword to each person who tried to pull it and failed, but no one taking it because there were witnesses.
I have enjoyed this first book immensely. One of the high points for me in the later chapters of the first book is the Badger's dissertation, and the ensuing discussion about kings vs. tyrants. I think it somehow fitting that man (as Wart) sees mankind as a king over nature, but nature (as Badger) conjectures man is a tyrant, based not on what man does, but on how nature responds to man, even when man is not exerting his "kingly" power over nature.
One question I am thinking about is whether there is some greater importance to the gifts sent to Arthur. Most gifts sent by folks from the Castle of the Forest Sauvage seem to reflect the person who sent them, which seems simple enough and maybe that's the point. The gifts sent by Robin's group seem to be more "aggrandizing", the pine martin gown and a bow Little John must know is taller than Arthur, therefore Arthur should not use it, as he would be "boasting", right? The gift from Lyo-lyok in particular seems to represent something different. Remember the horror and dislike when Lyo-loyk understood what Wart meant by War? Why would she then send weapons made from her own feathers?
I am way behind, and will be focusing this week on getting caught up. Folks should now be at around page 400 or a little farther along. By this coming Thursday (the 6th) folks should be finishing up the second book, "Queen of Air and Darkness".
I invite everyone to send some text describing their own impressions of the book, and letting folks know where they are in the book.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)