Kinder thoughts from Others and Reflections for the Book Club

Last week I shared some negative commentary on the Harry Potter series..This week I thought I’d offer up some positive thoughts (again: by People, Not Me). Here are a couple from Haley at Carrots from Michealmas. They’re both enthusiastic, pleasant, and kinder in tone than either of last weeks critics - one on the general good of the series and one containing SPOILERS..in sort of a moderate way..I read it after touching on Molly a bit in the comments with Jenna. I like Molly Weasley in this book - but I can’t stand her in any other book; I think she’d be a great jump off point for a discussion on the women and girls in the series..at some point, when most of them are more a part of the action. But, apart from not liking the character, she does have good points and Haley obviously loves her. Lets talk about it! (I mean, as much as we can at this point in the series.)

Jenna mentions unethical practices surrounding secrecy in the Wizarding world. YES! It’s just touched on in this book, but it does grow and grow throughout the series - wizards are sort of shockingly careless with the dignity and rights of others - in sort of an ‘the ends justify the means’ sort of way, and while there’s not much more that can be said about it at this point in the series, the off-handed way Ron mentions it lets us know how very common and acceptable it is in the magical community.

I think she’s right about Ron in this book too! This is sort of the book in which Ron is able to shine a bit. He’s staunch in his loyalty here - and as hungry as he is for success in his own right, he doesn’t envy his friend’s many moments of glory. It’s so nice, so wholesome, so friendly!

Jenna also highlights the line “always the innocent are the first victims”. It does seem like the truth, and I wonder most of all what was in the mind of the author when she wrote it. The Centaur, who speaks the line seems aware of, and mourning for the truth of his statement, but at the same time, unaffected by it. Like many creatures of fairy, who are aware of emotion without actually being able to experience it - the statement gives a sense of otherness, of separation to the centaurs that falls apart quickly, when we see in Firenze that deep emotions are a part of the centaur’s make-up. So what accounts for the disinterest of the centaur’s regarding innocent suffering? I suppose it could be the tendency continual involvement in divination often brings: to see the present only as it relates to the future. To be farsighted, in the sense of being blind to everything immediate. Living in potentialities and portents can be as debilitating as living wrapped in memories, mourning for what has past. With the mirror, we saw Harry tempted by the latter - by visions of loved ones dead and gone; with the centaurs we see a similar failure to live as they spend their time waiting for what may or may not be. It’s and interesting pairing, and it brings me back to something Christie writes in her refection - that “the danger lies in sacrificing or neglecting the good we do have to a potential or a might-have or a might-be.” Which may be the lesson all of us need to learn, whether our desires truly are, as Rilke promises ‘memories of our future’ or will-o-the wisps leading us from the narrow path to Love.

Ron and the Mirror

Wow..Jenna’s given us a ton to think about this week! If you haven’t read it already, check out her massively interesting post! I’m going to put alchemy on my back burner for now..because I need to read everything alchemical about 20 times and then dream about it to have it make sense. But if you’re not similarly challenged - post a response on it!! I really want to read more.

The Mirror:

What stood out to me most in this section was Ron’s vision in the mirror of Erised. I love the concept of the mirror - mirror magic is fantastic! It’s one of my favorite things - except after dark, which is sort of the best time for it, but the worst time for looking into mirrors in general. And the mirror itself is nicely done (except, I hate the name..because I’m a snot and just don’t like things like that; and excepting - as Jenna mentioned - the whole trouble of what the mirror would show “the happiest man on earth” Does Dumbledore believe - as it seems here - in nothing beyond this earth? Or does the mirror limit itself to desires earth can satisfy - which makes me wonder what happiness entails for Rowling. But Ron stood out most in the encounter with the mirror. I felt awful for him. Harry has had a real loss, and it’s obvious why he would long for family; but Ron, surrounded by family and yet full of a desperate need to prove himself, a striving that I think should have landed him in Slytherin. It made me feel uncomfortable with his family: Ron’s deepest desire is to outshine them all, be noticed and praised. It shows him with such a lonely, hungry little soul. I wanted something more for him there - but maybe, in his ability to turn away and back to reality, we’re able to see a bit of will-power in him, more than Harry has, to embrace life as it is, and not mourn for shadows. I’m glad he’s given that gift.

Symbolism and Sport:

This is a very minor question about Quidditch. I’ve been reading so much on the symbolism in the Harry Potter series..but can’t find anything on what the symbolism of Quidditch is. Is there any symbolism there??

Commentary by people, not me:

I read this article, by Harold Bloom of the Wall Street Journal recently, it's not a recent article. He is not a fan..unfortunately, he lost all my sympathy early on by implying that Rowling is much like Tolkien, and that he hates Tolkien just as much. People who hate Tolkien have no taste. But, if anyone wants to read him..we could insult his opinions, or occasionally defend opinions unrelated to J.R.R. Tolkien..though I'll need lots of convincing to love Alice in Wonderland half as much as The Hobbit. 

And here, Michael O Brien responds to those of you who think he's being unfair to the series. He mentions knowing "about eight different critics of the Potter series who either write books or magazine articles on the subject. All are sober people—" I'm not a huge fan of sober people..but I did feel bad for them when he added that "they suffer from personal attacks against them that are at times quite irrational, a kind of knee-jerk outrage against any criticism of Harry Potter." 

They're both interesting, SPOILER-FILLED reads..please don't assume I agree with either..remember - Harold Bloom hates Tolkien, and Michael O'Brien probably isn't a huge fan of girls who base major life decisions on dreams.., and don't read if you get too frustrated with un-friendly, non-fans of the books.. But do read if you can..and share your thoughts with me!

The Castle

Hogwarts was a good idea. It’s place as a living, breathing entity. Place as changeable, magical, wild. It’s captivating. There’s a sense of humor in the castle, as though thousands of laughing wizards have left their joy hidden in nooks and crannies; there’s power - as the misdirected spells of generations linger on the stairs and under tables.. Hogwarts feels to me like a school ought to - never truly left by the students who were - never truly understood by those who are, at the moment, nestled in it’s halls. I like it because - apart from the ghosts who are more like the modern, unbelieving concept of spirit - the castle is haunted in a deeper way, by memories and dreams -that-don’t-fade, by rich imaginings come to life.

Like Stonehenge, the castle is unknowable..and I don’t think it’s a spoiler to share that even Dumbledore hasn’t discovered all the secrets of Hogwarts. Like some immortal, ever-young being, the castle seems to watch and laugh anew as each new batch of children trip on the step that isn’t, run up stairways that end, and lose themselves in a world of possibility. It’s this rediscovery of the castle that makes me think Rowling might have a sacramental imagination - the sense of potential here, the power of unseen things, and most especially, the life of this place. I wonder, and I think I’ll be wondering again and again as we read - Is this the result of a sacramental imagination wedded to a relativistic worldview?

If you haven’t already - head over to Jenna’s for a taste of pumpkin pasties and some discussion of rule-breaking by both teachers and students, or to Christie’s for a helpful reminder that Harry’s vice is normal and will - hopefully - be grown out of before he’s through with school! As for me, this week has been full of unfinished intentions. I had a longer post planned but was distracted by the castle, my car (which is legal again!), and some overwhelming thoughts on social expectation and the trouble it creates for me.. I’m putting aside some hours for writing this weekend though, and should be all caught up next week (hahaha..I do live in a dreamworld, don’t I?)..maybe, partially caught up??

House Thoughts to follow up the Real Book Club Conversation

Regarding houses..My husband brought up an interesting point - and one I can’t really get out of my head regarding the House system in Harry Potter.

• Slytherin’s animal is the snake; Griffyndor’s is the lion; Ravenclaw has the eagle..

If Rowling had given Hufflepuff a goat, the houses could have formed a proper creature - a whole being. She didn’t. Is there a reason? It frustrates me..the Houses feel incomplete - almost a whole but not. Thoughts from anyone on this?

• I’m all in agreement with Laura’s comment about not binding children to their 11-year-old decisions as well. I think I’d prefer the idea of switching them up for the first three years or so, in varying groups but only loosely associated with a House, so they could meet each other and develop themselves in a non-competitive way.

• I’m also in agreement with poor Harry..Why don’t they do the sorting privately!! I would be such an embarrassed 11 year old at that point..I think I might just hide out in the bathroom and then come up after the feast saying .. Oops. I got lost, can you sort me privately. Thanks.

Incantational and Invocational.. The magic of problematic distinctions: A side note in the Harry Potter Book Club

There are many points of view toward the problem of Christians embracing the magical world of Harry Potter. In her introductory post, Jenna mentions the debate and cites an argument in the books’ defense: John Granger’s distinction between incantational and invocational magic. It’s a popular argument for Christian fans of the seriesl; in it, he defines invocational magic as sorcery, the “calling in [of] demonic principalities and powers for personal power”; and incantational magic as essentially the chanting of spells. Again and again in his Looking for God in Harry Potter, Granger emphasizes that invocational magic is forbidden by Scripture, but just as often, directly implies that incantational magic is not. I’m disturbed by the distinction. I think we’ll be having a few conversations throughout the reading on various interesting elements of J.K. Rowling’s concept of magic - and I don’t want in any way to close off the continuation of this discussion at later points, but I’d like to bring it up for first thoughts here, just over the threshold of Hogwarts, as Harry beings his education in incantational magic.

It’s true that Rowling’s magic calls down no demons, implores no gods, and request no aid from “principalities and powers”- good or evil. In that sense her wizards are entirely what C.S. Lewis calls ‘materialist magicians’ - concentrating powers entirely apart from a spiritual relationship. But magic doesn’t require an invocation to be forbidden - the majority of divination is devoid of invocations, as are some of the more frightening spells, and even well-meaning forms of magic are forbidden to us - and not only because of the spiritual dangers inherent to invocational magic. Magic is dangerous to the soul of man because it sets him up as a god, it teaches him to take control, to put his trust in his own power and not in Christ, and magic - whether it calls down ‘demonic principalities and powers’ or relies totally on the will of the practitioner - as Rowling’s magic does - gives the magician an inappropriate and dangerous level of influence over his fellow men and his world. John Granger’s distinction, though, implies that a teenager picking up a book of spells at The Gnu’s Room (I’m sure they have a magic section, everyone does!) is well within the dictates of her Catholic faith in choosing ‘to sing along with’ these spells, because, like the majority of spell-books on the market, they don’t ‘invoke’ anything so much as they attempt to channel power -just as Harry and his friends do.

Granger then goes on to liken Rowling’s magic to that of Lewis and Tolkien. There are similarities, for certain, but he chooses a strange example in Caspian’s invocation of aid (it’s a musical invocation, which is Granger’s link to his approved incantational magic - but it’s hard to avoid the obvious call to help from beyond), he does not mention King Tirian’s more straightforward invocation of the children in The Last Battle, nor the abundance of invocations of Elbereth in Tolkien’s books. Magic is not something easily divided - incantations often invoke, invocations often implore, and God-magic can include both - as the Liturgy does, as Tirian’s call or Frodo’s “A Elbereth Gilthoniel” do; as forbidden magic does (and all magic apart from God is forbidden, be it chanting spells or calling up ghosts).

The impression I get is that Granger is searching for a loophole because he likes the books, and because they raise him up as they do Jenna - toward God-magic and mystery - so he uses these distinctions to clear his mind of uncertainty and defend the books against those who are uncomfortable with the magic used. But that’s not how magic works. It doesn’t fall neatly into categories: forbidden invocations and approved incantations. There is only the holy magic of the Church and magic proper - which is forbidden in all forms, at all times, and in all aspects.

Does that mean the Harry Potter books are completely off-limits to Christians? I’m reading them now, so obviously I don’t think so, and this post is less about the aspects of Rowling’s magic that should disturb her readers (we’re avoiding spoilers!) than it is about distinctions within the discussion of magic itself. What do you think of the distinction between invocational and Incantational magic in the defense of the series?

Thoughts on Wands and Class from the Harry Potter Book Club

It’s raining. Yarrow’s napping with Luba on the big bed, her head creeping closer and closer to the edge. The girl loves edges - she has no fear. Jenna and Christie have both brought up wands..we talk a bit about various woods and lengths in Jenna’s commentary..and about the purpose of wands in Christie’s commentary. I’ve always been a bit annoyed at the length of Rowling’s wands..it’s a minor point, I know, but an 8” wand would be so very awkwardly short! My husband - who is especially frustrated by the lengths, is taking over a bit of this post to show us why!

We’re in Diagon Alley with Harry Potter, and onward - to his first taste of Hogwarts. I like the class humor in these early chapters. In later books, I notice a harder edge in Rowling’s attitude toward the middle-class suburbanite Dursleys, but for now it’s still amusing and endearing. They are a complete caricature of suburban striving - nosy, unimaginative, and banal..but not so completely dismissed as to make the caricature unkind or universal. In Diagon Alley we meet the caricature of the rich, blue-blooded Draco Malfoy whose ease at being fitted for new robes indicates he’s spent plenty of time at the tailor’s. Draco’s preoccupation with family history, surnames, and getting in with the right set at school makes me certain his family has the wizarding equivalent of yachts and tennis courts chilling around their manor house. Harry’s confusion in his first meeting with the wizarding upper-classes is endearing..he’s uncomfortable, but content enough in his own interpretation of the experience so far to avoid being drawn into Malfoy’s attitude. Harry is somewhat outside class - as lost in suburbia as he would be along side Draco, watching with longing the pleasantly proletariat Weasleys knock about at the train station. It’s an opportunity to set him up to do ‘great things’ formed either by a connection to and welcoming of the good that can grow in all of the classes he can see - but never belong to; or else a rejection of these pockets of belonging and all the people who fit easily in one or the other. I don’t know that Rowling managed either in the end..but right now, Harry is still in formation - full of potential and the loneliness it brings.

And now, here’s Seth:

   The subject of wand-length came up in discussion recently; being somewhat visual I decided photos were needed to aid the “are they too short, too long, or just right?” debate. Everything was measured carefully (brushes included bristles) and came within a quarter-inch accuracy (mostly dead-on). They are listed in order of appearance in chapter five, starting with Lily Potter (note the nice, feminine hand position).

“ ‘Ah yes,’ said the man… ‘ It seems only yesterday she was in here herself, buying her first wand. Ten and a quarter inches long, swishy, made of willow. Nice wand for charm work’.” 

                                (not actually made of willow. Made of chainsaw sharpening file)

Next is James Potter: “ ‘Your father, on the other hand, favored a mahogany wand. Eleven inches. Pliable. A little more power and excellent for transfiguration…’ ”

                                (certain tiny wand shoppers have no respect for personal space)

And of course, Voldy.

       "Mr. Ollivander touched the lightning scar on Harry's forehead with a long white finger. 

        'I'm sorry to say I sold the wand that did it' he said softly. Thirteen-and-a-half inches. Yew. Powerful wand...' "

                      (Aggressive. Green. Gritty. No, really. Actually gritty. The wand is fake, not the dirt)

Then a couple of Harry's rejects: "Right then, Mr Potter. Try this one. Beechwood and dragon heartstring. Nine inches...' " and "... 'Maple and Phoenix feather. Seven inches. Quite whippy... ' "

                                              (Chopstick. Carpenter's pencil. Not terribly impressive)

Skipping his last reject (which, at eight and a half is between those two) we finally have Harry's wand itself.

" 'Tricky customer, eh? Not to worry... yes, why not - unusual combination - holly and phoenix feather, eleven inches, nice and supple.' "

  (Um, that yellow is just phoenix tail poking through. It is definitely NOT oil paint I forgot to clean)

So I suppose whether these representations look right, wrong, or a mix, is dependent on your pre-formed mental image of "appropriate magic wand". Mine tends toward something a bit longer and a bit less "something I found lying around the house"-ish.

                                                                          -The Neglected (and can you tell it's been rainy here and I've had a lot of time on my hands?) Husband

The Book Club: 'the name issue.'

Jenna’s given us a lovely bit of direction in her post on the early chapters (2-4) of book one. A few options, and a recipe for Knickerbocker Glory for those of you with a craving for sugar! In the comments there, we’re breaking open thoughts on snake symbolism, on ice cream, and on fear. But here I want to talk a bit more about the use of names.

As Jenna mentioned in her post on Harry’s first meeting with the magical world - there is early introduction to the name taboo when Harry first meets Hagrid. It’s an interesting, if overdone recognition of the power of names themselves. Names are fascinating and the superstitions around them vary, but all respect the power of the name itself. Rowling walks an interesting line between the fear-filled superstition rampant in the wizarding world regarding the Voldemort’s name, and the careless power displayed by Harry and Dumbledore later in the book as Harry continually forgets to fear and Dumbledore (it seems) never considered the possibility. I’m disappointed that she makes Hagrid so affected in his refusal to speak the name. It’s embarrassing,  at odds with his character, and awkward. I can see the attempt to make him sort of a ‘salt-of-the-earth, peasant-type’ but the trembly uncertainty in him when he speaks of ‘he who must not be named’ makes me wish Rowling had spent more time with actual people who kept name taboos instead of misdirecting her imagination. 

The refusal to say a name, out of holy or out of superstitious fear, is generally less of a ‘terror’ and more of a matter-of-fact. A man who refers to the devil as ‘himself’, ‘the old man’, or ‘old scratch’ is not speaking so much out of terror and in self-defense. He does it without a second thought and definitely without a little tremor of fear. He does it the way a mother puts knives in the upper drawer - absentmindedly, because it is the way to keep safe. Rowling makes a production out of it here, too much so, and it frustrates the whole moment of explanation.

A holy fear of naming - such as God requires - is respectful, a refusal to claim the authority naming gives. Something, I think we’ll see in a negative sense among Voldemort’s followers (who also have a tendency to avoid naming him). A superstitious fear worries it might accidentally call up a being it can’t control. Which is why we avoid calling for dead relatives in graveyards, why fairies have so many careful nicknames, why we gossip about what “she did with that man” instead of naming names. It’s a realistic fear, especially in Harry’s world; but Rowling does a lovely thing with Harry in allowing him to forget that fear. Because while it’s true that “fear of a name increases fear of the thing itself” it’s also true that speaking the name of another gives, in a vague and magical sense, a hint of power over him. We do not speak the name of God, but when we cast out demons, we do so by name. I like the subtle reminder here, that Harry is unafraid of Voldemort’s name because he has no need to fear. He rests in the power he has only begun to discover. 

The Harry Potter Book Club

 

I can never say no to a book club..

My blogging friends, Jenna and Christie are joining me in a long, reflective read-through of the series, with plenty of time for discussion, for food and drink, for music making, and happy arguments because we are all reading from different starting points. Jenna is our fan - Harry and she are long friends and he’s blessed her life in real and tangible ways. Christie is the newbie, and I’m excited to see how her fully trained and insightful sense of magic and mystery receive J.K. Rowling’s wizarding world.

 I am not a fan. I’ve read them (some of them more than once or twice) but there’s something that irks me in the series (a few things, actually) and I’ll be sharing a lot of those critical thoughts here, along with the parts I think Rowling gets right, because there are plenty of those as well…and I’m not going to pretend it’s not fun to be reading with friends, playing with recipes, and having some fantastic conversations, because it is.

As Jenna mentioned in her amazing introductory post (Read it Now!) We won’t be discussing - except in passing maybe, or unless someone else wants to take up that position - the argument that Harry Potter is bad reading because it contains magic and dragons.. None of us have the wish or temperament to argue against either; but that doesn’t mean I won’t be bringing up the problematic aspects of Harry’s magic (there are plenty), and I think a good long discussion of this whole ‘incantational vs. Invocational’ argument has to happen at some point as well, which will be fascinating! Well be talking about the character of the characters, about Rowling's worldview, about the role of men as fathers in the books, and about whatever else you encourage us to talk about! Because this is interactive, which means that if you have an opinion, we're going to hear it, and discuss it with you!  I'm really excited about this club! I’m looking forward especially to learning a lot about how the books have shaped how people see the world, do they inspire readers to see the world in rich possibilities or do they tie reader’s down to a secular-relativistic worldview in which evil is decidedly banal and suburban and good is it’s very near twin??

The first book is laying in wait for me somewhere on thrift-store shelves..I’ll be hunting it down today with Petka in tow - who loves the illustrations, thought the words bore her with their lack of “moon” and “dog” references..Maybe book three will prove delightful in that - it was always my favorite of the series, if only for the brief-but-long-awaited ‘strong male characters’.

My reading recommendations (inspired by and adding to Christie’s excellent list!)

Wine - to lower resistance (to either Rowling’s writing or your own critical thoughts..whichever you tend to reject when sober)

A friend/spouse/sister/brother..someone to read aloud to when bits need discussion, when something delights you or bothers you. And remember, even if all the books bother you, it’s ok to be delighted by sections, just as it’s ok to be appalled by some things, even if you love the series overall. No author gets it all right!

Tapestries and incense..because everything reads better with Tapestries and incense!

Let’s begin …

Thinking Out Loud..The Trouble with Blogging

“The truth is rarely pure and never simple.”

~Oscar Wilde

About a week ago, a friend shared an article with me on the popularity of Mormon mommy blogs. She mentioned that perhaps a part of their appeal is that, unlike many Catholic blogs, the Mormons rarely refer to their faith, they aren’t out in the open, working through their issues, struggling with the requirements of faith, and openly seeking to form a community of like-minded brothers and sisters in the blogging world. They simply share a part of their lives, a clean, fresh image with only a little bit of struggle. The conversation, and the article itself started me thinking again about the place of information and about living modestly in our written lives.

Catholic women tend to write blogs that are too open in many ways. We over-share sometimes in areas of marital strife, fertility, birth, and our continuing pursuit of sainthood. We gripe about the world’s misrepresentation of our faith, and sometimes, we focus too much on these frustrating areas of life and less on the beauty that permeates everything in life - a beauty sometimes dark and terrible, sometimes light and healing. In other words, we fall on the opposite end of the spectrum from the happy Mormon blogs. We struggle out loud and in the open with private issues and hide the happy and easy parts of life from our readers, or - like I often do, we share our thoughts only after they’ve formed completely - failing to use the community we’ve created to shape and develop our thoughts.

So what is the balance? What balance am I trying to strike here, on Cyganeria? I don’t know. I’m working toward a blog that is less static in it’s ideas and portrayal of my artistic life, a blog that nurtures growth in myself and others, and that encourages thought and discussion. But I know I’ll always want to avoid over-sharing - there will be not instantaneous reactions to a new thought or dream or ideal; those writings are for my journal, to gestate in my own mind until they are ready. I don’t want this site to be merely a sink for my own overflowing mind, and I don’t want any struggles I may experience to bring doubt to my readers, but I would like to avoid giving the impression of perfection - of surety and sainthood already achieved. Reading, briefly, some of the Mormon blogs, I see them doing the same (posting pictures of messy-haired mothers grinding coffee in weekend kitchens) and laughing over mistakes. They walk a balance of their own, I’m sure, in their witness to the beauty of domesticity.

Dreaming

It’s been too warm for March this year. Warm and grey and sort of dismal. The warmth is actually nice, except that we won’t be getting much in the way of maple syrup, and in that it feels off to me to have nights above freezing and days of watching the muddy snow melt away. When the sun is hidden too long, I have trouble rising out of my dreams and greeting the day. Today is brighter than yesterday - we can almost see blue in patches of sky and I’m trying to make use of the bright moments to finish my cleaning, beat out the rugs, and write the letters to friends I’ve been allowing to pile up on the desk.

Jenna wrote on Monday about the cost of writing, being in part, a willingness to share the deep parts of yourself, to really bleed out, instead of merely writing the surface. It’s true, and it is an essential, but sometimes I wonder if, in this over-sharing world of ours, the challenge is less to share deeply, and more to know the way to walk between a overload of all the emotional and personal details and an ability to write reflectively - sharing what communicates and what leads to understanding, avoiding what may be deep and personal, but is also too much information - what ends up clouding the point. Maybe it’s about being ‘all in’ to writing, and not all into yourself.

It’s a balance I’m still learning to walk. In my writing I walk on the reserved side - as yet unprepared to reveal my whole self, and the pursuit of openness is a daily one, like the pursuit of holiness, and the attempt to walk through each day full awake and alive to the beauties in each moment.

Tea Retreat

Jenna and I are retreating from our discussion for the season. We have plans to pick it up - less often and refreshed, after Christmas. For the rest of this month, I’m pursuing other projects. Christmas is fast approaching - I have a little dress to make, presents to wrap, pork to collect from the butcher, and so many winter plans to bring to fruition. We have an icy layer of snow on the ground, it’s a loud walking under the stars, when everything else is silent.

I’m planning my own retreat from Cyganeria for a week or so, because our last discussion of the distractions inherent in our technological world has reminded me of my own tendency to become absorbed in the world online. So I’ll be writing more, praying more, reading more, and putting my snow-covered yard in order this week, all while hopefully building those daily habits of beauty that I so desire to make a part of every moment.

 

Enjoy a week of tea and reflection, with a good book or two, and some homemade croissants. A delightful accompaniment to snowy afternoon reading is a drink called London Fog: early grey tea, steamed milk (or light cream) and just a hint of vanilla (I like tossing half a vanilla bean in the milk as it heats on the stove). It’s lovely with croissants, or Russian tea cakes (if you don’t put any sugar in your tea).

Delayed Discussion - More on Books

I’d like to continue last week’s conversation on the importance of books. Jenna’s response last week was delightful, and I couldn’t help but think it over again and again, along with the comments George left on my own post. Jenna is right, we don’t need books themselves anymore than we need writing at all. We exist without them, but do we thrive without them? But printed pages and pretty bindings have as much to do with aesthetics as practicality. We are creatures made for beauty and substance - for an experience that unites the senses, as a good book does.

I realize that I’m biased. That, while I’m not anti-technology, I’m also not a lover of all things new. And ebooks are completely impractical in my life, more so than my little laptop and my solar-powered Christmas lights. But that’s one of the glories of books themselves. Physical things, requiring nothing but a willing mind, they transcend so many boundaries. I can lend and borrow books, I can nestle beside my window with a book and not worry about finishing it before the battery dies. And I worry a bit, because now, when we travel, people bring along an ipod packed with days of music, a ebook loaded down with potential, and there is less and less space for human contact. When I travel, and am tired of Rilke and whoever else I’ve brought along, I’m forced to see the people around me. I’ve had my palm and birth-date interpreted by an Indian musician, I’ve listened to a paroled drug-dealer tell me all about his adorable pet bunny, eaten grapefruit in the rain with a man who ‘just needed a million dollars’ to make his life right, and laughed with a drunk Irishman on his plane-ride home. Each conversation started because the few books I could pack didn’t hold my attention and the world woke up around me. If I’d had my entire library along, they would never have been, and I would be without those people in my mind.

 

I know that the loss of human contact in our culture is not the fault of the ebook, and I have no problem with it’s existence, I just worry about it’s effect. George, Jenna, does this worry you at all? What do you think, everyone, am I just ridiculous to want a physical thing that can be asked about and then set aside? Is there a way to share ebooks? Do you ever regret having too many choices?

Why do we need books?

Why does the world need books?

      When I answered this question last week, I wasn’t thinking of books as objects, I was thinking of literature, specifically. When Jenna responded, she mentioned that this question deserved a discussion of it’s own; so now I’m starting that discussion by looking at why the world needs books - not merely writing or literature, but the books themselves.

I don’t own an e-reader: a kindle or a nook or whatever other brands have come out. I don’t like reading from a screen enough to want one and I don’t need another thing to plug into my cigarette lighter. But apart from that, I don’t own one because I really like the feeling of holding a book. I like the texture of pages - thick, cream-colored journals or barely there Bible pages. I like the scent of books, old and new. Books give us something e-books can’t: a sensual connection to the words. I’m not anti-technology, I love blogging and facebooking, I like the ability to connect to people across the country quickly. But I don’t have an emotional connection to my laptop like I do to my books, I can’t fold down page corners and write in notes in my margins. I think we need books to continue connecting our minds to our senses and to have something meaningful that lasts when technology fails.

Any thoughts?

Thanksgiving..and the discussion

It’s Thanksgiving. And yesterday I was busier than I am today, baking the pies and tarts and bread for today. This morning we had apple pastries with caramel sauce and whipped cream for breakfast, with black coffee to cut the sweetness. The turkey is ready to go in the oven, but it’s a bit early yet, so I have time to post the discussion I failed to write yesterday, which is another list, longer than last weeks, in honor of the holiday:

 

1. If you could escape into just one story, what would it be?

I think it would be … I really don’t know. I don’t think I want to escape completely into any story..

2. What book do you think should be mandatory for writers?

I don’t really like the idea of any book being mandatory, I think reading in abundance should be, but not any specific book…If I had to choose, I’d lean towards Tolstoy’s Human and Divine collection, there is so much that is universally good in those stories, which might help in giving direction.

3. What movie do you think should be mandatory viewing for writers?

..again with the “mandatory”..but I would push Babette’s Feast or Pan’s Labyrinth on anyone. I would also push Serenity on anyone, but not necessarily because it would help with writing, just because I’m obsessed.

4. Do you ever take drugs, smoke, or drink to ‘encourage’ your imagination while writing?

No. But I loved hearing one writer (I wish I could remember who) say that after reading Hemingway, he announced to his class that he wanted to be an alcoholic when he grew up ( so he could write like Hemingway..

5. Why does the world need books?

I’m stealing this directly from the website that gave me this list (and Hemingway) “..to make things truer than if they actually happened.”

6. What part of the process do you find most difficult?

Editing. It’s not at all based on mood and inspiration, but on discipline, and I’m lacking a lot of that discipline. That said, I think editing is where most of my writing goes from pathetic to likeable.

7. What books have scared you the most?

As far as books that freak me out, I had a little, old book written in German that terrified me for no known reason. I couldn’t read it, and it always seemed to be turning up in new places, I hated it, but it took me a few years to actually get rid of it. A part from that, I really can’t think of one, though I’ m sure there were a few that gave me trouble sleeping..

How about you? And Happy Thanksgiving!

Discussing Lists..

Because I love lists, I’m stealing this week’s discussion straight from Spinning Straw Into Gold:

 

Three things that have made me a better writer..

1. Honestly, and not just in an attempt to tie in to last weeks discussion: obsessing over writers I love. Picking them apart and analysing the text. Jenna’s right when she says analysis is supposed to influence and encourage us. It does, and who better to find encouragement in that the stories I can’t live without! Analysing them, specifically is a way to focus in on what is so attractive to me about certain authors. It also helps me realize when my own style is being over-run by a new favorite, so I can step back and re-evaluate.

2. Blogging. I know I don’t edit nearly enough here, and that my spelling is embarrassing, but I really do think that blogging itself, as well as the community I’ve discovered here has improved my writing, and encouraged me to keep at it. It’s like having constant, but not at all overwhelming pressure to perform, just a little bit; to reflect just a little bit more than usual, and also to open my writing up a bit more for criticism..which is something I’ve always had trouble doing.

3. Living Intensely. Life itself, with all it’s joys and sorrows, really is the best teacher. Nothing forces me to write honestly and passionately more than deep pain or overwhelming happiness, and each day I live I learn anew how many experiences are beyond my understanding. This opportunity, to learn and suffer and grow as a person as well as a writer is the best formation we have, and I’m grateful as I learn to take my life and form it into many tiny pieces of beauty.

What about you? They don’t have to be different, we can agree. Or maybe there is something else entirely for you?

Elections and the Exhausted Fan

I don’t know about everyone else, but I’m nursing a post-election hangover..

 

Not because I stayed up late to hear the results come in, I didn’t, we went to bed before eight last night actually, though the pigs woke me up at 12:30 (I’ve no idea why, I think they were mad that their water froze) -just in time to feed the stove and hear the election results. I’ve got a hangover because ‘election day’ is so full of emotion for everyone around me. So many people pinning their hopes and dreams on one person. Facebook is full of argument and exultation.

I’d like to keep it light today. Jenna’s post last week was delightful! Reading about Jenna’s Harry Potter fandom always makes me want to go to one of the fan conventions, I know I wouldn’t really belong, but I’d like it if I wasn't alone. Jenna, if there’s ever one on the east coast, you can stay with us, and we can go together. I won’t think or say anything snarky, I’ll just enjoy myself.

Jenna mentioned textual analysis in her post on fandom. Analyzing the texts we love is a big part of loving for many of us..(and not just in literary fandom, my husband and I have talked for hours about various hidden beauties in Firefly!) So when we analyze how often to we critique? Or is it just all affirmation (for me, it is mostly affirmation..I like to defend my favorites, even against my own mind). But occasionally, I’ll be tough. I think. Maybe…hmm..I can’t really think of a time, but I know they exist. I’ve thought that Tolkien should have had longer appendices, that he could have included more of the daily-life of the various races, that he might of added more history..nothing that actually would have increased the popularity of the books, I’m sure, but things I would have preferred. Textual analysis of my favorite books is almost always submissive to The Fan Instinct, but it is a delightful aspect, and the language of Tolkien allows me to analyze as I would myth or hagiography, instead of fiction - dorky, I know, but absolutely delightful. I like grand themes and minutiae, I like character histories, but not too much information. I like mystery too.

How do you analyze your favorites? What aspects do you find most intriguing? How does it develop your relationship to the text?

The Fan..

 

I thought we’d talk about literary fandom this week. Last week, I linked a post I’d found about the fans of Twilight. It was interesting, in that it gave an idea of how we tend to dismiss Other Fans as ridiculous without looking for the shared experience. The blogger is not a Twilight fan, neither am I, and it’s true I have trouble understanding why fans of the series don’t see the issues I see in the books, but the post had a tone that tended toward unkind. Not being a fan of the series, I missed a lot of the attitude in my first look. But I can catch it in any review of Tolkien because I'm fan. Not the dorky kind, the one who names her kids after characters or watches the awful movies Peter Jackson made from The Lord of the

Rings over and over. I’m kind that learned elvish and Old English in College, studies the Appendices and can tell you all about the First Age of Middle Earth. So, the dorkier kind, I guess. I never really put myself under the label: Tolkien Fan until I caught myself correcting someone on a tiny detail from the Silmarrillion, my husband looked at me and grinned, knowing I’d have to see it now. So I’m developing a sympathy for Harry Potter fans, and Twilight fans. It’s not Tolkien, but there is something similar in the way all fans relate to their books. For me the real relationship was possible because there was a whole mythology, there was depth and meaning and intention, along with a story to follow and characters to love. I like knowing that there is information I’ll never know, I like the grandness of it all and the obsessiveness of the author. I like being able to fall into a world that is real enough to believe in. But there are other reasons books have fans. What is similar? What’s different?