Reading Buddies Discussion: “Animal Farm” by George Orwell

Reading Buddies Button

Hello, Animal Farm reading buddies! I’ll admit, I haven’t actually started the book itself yet. I think my reasons for that are twofold. First, I’ve been visiting family for the past week, which means very little reading has happened. Second, I worry that unless I brush up on my history, I won’t “get” the deeper levels of Animal Farm. I’ve read the introduction to my edition (the Everyman’s Library one), but that’s as far as I’ve gotten. That being said, feel free to discuss any part you’d wish; just warn of spoilers, please!

So, instead of sharing my thoughts on the first half of Animal Farm, I thought I’d give some bullet point facts about Orwell and the book. If you have something to add, please feel free to do so in the comments!

  • Animal Farm by George Orwell (cover)George Orwell was born in 1903 and died in 1950.
  • His real name was Eric Blair.
  • Orwell served with the Indian Imperial Police in Burma from 1922 to 1927.
  • The author of the introduction, Julian Symons, who knew Orwell, said of him “the telling of unpalatable truths was to Orwell a kind of duty. It would be wrong to deny that it was at times also a pleasure” (p. xii).
  • Animal Farm was written during the end of 1943 and the beginning of 1944.
  • Four publishers, including Orwell’s usual publisher, rejected Animal Farm because of its anti-Stalin message; no one wanted to risk offending the Soviet Union, which played an important role for the Allies during World War II.
  • Animal Farm was finally published in 1946.

I’m hoping to actually get to Animal Farm itself over the next week or so. I’ve heard that even without an intimate knowledge of relevant history, it’s a good story, so I should probably just jump right in!

Have you started (or read) Animal Farm yet? Have you read anything else by Orwell?

Sunday Salon: Looking Back (April) and Time Out

The Sunday Salon.comHappy May! Hm, as I type this I realize I haven’t done a Sunday Salon post for a while. Two orders of business for today. First, I’ve decided to take the next week off. I’ll be visiting family, so I won’t get much reading done anyway, plus I think I could use a break. The only thing I’ll be posting is the Reading Buddies discussion for Animal Farm by George Orwell on Friday. After that, I should be back to posting the following Monday. Have a wonderful week!

Second, it’s time again for another monthly review! Here’s what my April looked like:

Books

Looking Back: April

Total books read: 9
Total pages read: 3,425 (almost double any other month, thanks to the Readathon and the Chaos Walking series…whoa!)
Favorite book: I loved seven of the nine books I read, which is great! If pressed, I’d probably have to choose the Chaos Walking series, though.
Least favorite book: The Crying of Lot 49 by Thomas Pynchon, hands down.

Audiobooks

Total audiobooks listened to: 4
Total hours listened: 33 hours and 27 minutes
Favorite audiobook: The Imposter by Damon Galgut (read by my favorite, Humphrey Bower!)
Least favorite audiobook: Probably Freakonomics. It was interesting and well read, but I got a little tired of statistics.

Erin Reads

Your Turn!

That was my April. How was yours?

My Week in Books: April 24-30

My Week in Books

Welcome to my weekly Saturday feature here at Erin Reads, where I highlight new books that have entered my life, what I’ve been reading, and what’s happened on Erin Reads over the past week.

New Acquisitions

No vlog again this week, as my only new acquisition was a copy of Animal Farm by George Orwell for May’s Reading Buddies. (Want to join me??) I do have some exciting books theoretically on their way to me (or soon to be!), so hopefully I’ll be back to vlogging soon!

TBR Additions

Just one this week: The Paris Wife by Paula McLain. I’m always looking for good audiobooks, so I’m taking Mary’s advice and adding this one to my list. I had no idea it was about Hemingway!

Read This Week

It’s been a satisfying reading week. I finished The Hill of Devi by E.M. Forster for my classics project, The Corrections for Reading Buddies, and Monsters of Men by Patrick Ness. Getting those three off my plate has freed up my time for Miss New India by Bharati Mukherjee, which I’m half way through and really enjoying so far!

On audio, I’m most of the way through Bodily Harm by Margaret Atwood. It’s not one of my favorites of hers, but that doesn’t mean much as I’ve yet to encounter a book by Atwood I haven’t liked quite a bit.

Erin Reads Recap

Your Turn!

How was your reading week? Do tell!

Reading Buddies Wrap-Up: “The Corrections” by Jonathan Franzen

Reading Buddies Button

Well, I’ve finally read my first Franzen novel. I have rather mixed feelings about it. Judging by the comments on our discussion post, it seems I’m not the only one. (If you haven’t read The Corrections, beware…spoilers are fair game here!)

After reading The Corrections, I can definitely say that Franzen does do some things well:

  • First, for me, is the writing. I cannot deny that the man has a way with words. Every once in a while I thought he went a bit over the top, but mostly I slipped easily into the prose. I think my very favorite lines came on the cruise ship when Enid met Dr. Hibbard. The good doctor is described thusly:

“His smile was adorability itself. It took hostage the part of Enid that melted at the sight of seal pups and kittens, and it refused to release her until, somewhat grudgingly, she’d smiled back.” (p. 317)

  • As Steph pointed out, his dialogue is “pitch-perfect.” Honestly, I didn’t really notice the dialogue until Steph brought it up. Once she did, I realized dialogue that doesn’t stick out is perhaps the best kind…or the most realistic, anyway. I never found myself cringing or rolling my eyes at the things the characters said to one another, which I noticed once Steph brought it to my attention.
  • I commented in the discussion post that at 200 pages in I felt Franzen’s characters were stereotypes. Several people responded saying that as the book continued, the characters moved away from those preset roles. I did find that to be true. I think, instead, that the Lamberts as a family were something of a time period-specific American stereotype. Like, if you ever want to see a slice of America at the turn of the 21st century, just read The Corrections. I do think it takes skill to capture something like that. I wonder how all the allusions will fare as time passes. In 50 years, will The Corrections still ring as true?
  • Matt commented that Gary’s “entire life has been set up to be correction to his father’s.” After reading Matt’s insight, I began to notice all the ways the title wove its way into the novel, how the characters were constantly making corrections, trying to line their lives up with what they thought would make them the happiest, based on what they’d learned and what they saw around them. I do appreciate when titles tie into the novels they represent in interesting ways.

I had my share of dislikes too, though:

  • The Corrections by Jonathan Franzen (cover)I thought the book was too long. If I hadn’t been reading the book with all of you, I’d most likely have gotten bored and given up.
  • I felt like Franzen mocked his characters, like he was constantly belittling them, laughing at their misery. How am I supposed to care about characters for whom the author seems to have only contempt? (Or am I not supposed to care about them?)
  • I didn’t like any of the characters, nor did I care what happened to them. 500+ pages is a long time to follow the ordinary lives of people you don’t care about.
  • Emily, a fellow Midwesterner, wasn’t keen on the way Franzen stereotypes Midwesterners…and I have to say I agree.

Overall, I felt like The Corrections was a book for the mind. While interesting intellectually, it left me emotionally cold. I’d long thought beautiful writing was the one thing I loved best in a book, but The Corrections has made me reconsider. I think perhaps, for me, the characters come first, with the writing running a close second. So, I suppose even if I didn’t love the book, I did learn something about myself as a reader! I can’t say I’ll be running out right away to acquire Franzen’s most recent novel, Freedom.

What were your final reactions to The Corrections by Jonathan Franzen? Check out other participants’ thoughts:

Did I miss you? Just let me know and I’ll add your link.

CRP: “The Hill of Devi” by E.M. Forster (Part 2)

The Classics Reclamation Project is my personal challenge to read and enjoy the classics. Each Wednesday, I post about the classic I’m reading at the moment.

The Classics Reclamation Project

This week I finished up The Hill of Devi by E.M. Forster, which is Forster’s account of his two trips to India during the early years of the twentieth century. First published in 1953, it’s told mainly through letters, which Forster edited and joined with narration into a cohesive account. The text also includes a couple of explanatory essays which complement the correspondence.

The Hill of Devi by E.M. Forster (cover)Forster’s first trip to India occurred from late 1912 to early 1913, when he was visiting. During the second and longer trip, in 1921, he served as Private Secretary to the Maharajah of Dewas, filling in a six-month gap during which the Maharajah’s usual Secretary was away on sick leave. The letters from which The Hill of Devi is assembled were written mainly to family and friends.

What struck me most as I read The Hill of Devi was how different Forster’s conversational tone was from that of his fiction. Though I’ve enjoyed the novels by Forster I’ve read (Howards End and A Passage to India to date), I’ve never felt swept away by them; it’s always seemed there was a bit of distance imposed by the narration that kept me from falling too deeply into the story. In The Hill of Devi, though, the letters and narrative are Forster’s voice as a man and a tourist of sorts, not as a novelist, and the change is delightful. The prose are wonderfully easy to read, and Forster clearly enjoys his visits, for the most part. He is, at times, even gently funny, turning mundane situations into entertaining anecdotes:

“It was in the midst of [my assistant’s] broken English (here a squirrel runs down the stairs) that I discovered the £1,000 motor batteries. The works of science are his–all the garages, which I inspected yesterday–imagine me inspecting garages! A monkey nearly bit me and rightly–all wells and cisterns, including the Krishna water works–and the “electric men” (here the squirrel runs back; it has gone to the state drawing room to sit inside a piano). I really must stop now.” (p. 88)

Throughout, Forster offers first-hand experiences of state affairs, religious ceremonies, and everyday life. He chronicles his clothing, the cuisine, the climate, and his opinions of the people he meets. It’s clear he’s quite fond of the Maharajah and gets along very well with most people he encounters, and there’s a willingness to go along for the ride that pervades his letters. I can see glimpses of how his time in India must have affected A Passage to India.

Speaking of which, Forster mentions this novel at the end of his 1921 letters. I love his description of how actually visiting the country where the novel is set affected his writing process:

“I began [A Passage to India] before my 1921 visit, and took out the opening chapters with me, with the intention of continuing them. But as soon as they were confronted with the country they purported to describe, they seemed to wilt and go dead and I could do nothing with them. I used to look at them of an evening in my room at Dewas, and felt only distaste and despair. The gap between India remembered and India experienced was too wide. When I got back to England the gap narrowed, and I was able to resume.” (p. 238)

Forster goes on to say that he most likely wouldn’t have finished the novel without Leonard Woolf’s encouragement. (Don’t you love it when literary worlds collide?)

I’m so happy I stumbled on The Hill of Devi. I only came across it because I was perusing the Wikipedia page for A Passage to India, which I read just before The Hill of Devi. I liked reading them back-to-back, as I do feel they provide two sides of one man’s experience, in a way. I ended up liking the nonfiction account a bit better than the novel, I think because of how simply and genuinely it conveyed Forster’s impressions of India. I’m glad I read them both, though!

Now I’d like to ask your help. I want my next classic to be one I can really get into, that I won’t want to put down. Any suggestions? What classics have you loved with your heart even more than your head?