i [melissa] have selected "love you, mean it" as my pick for september. the book is written by patricia carrington, julia collins, claudia gerbasi and ann haynes - four women widowed after
september 11th who as a result formed a lasting bond.
having lived in new york for eight years, september 11th was a nightmarish experience for me and continues to be an extremely difficult day each year. reading this book in 2006 was like a balm for my soul. it gave me great perspective on my marriage, my relationships with family and friends, my life, my relationship with God. i've recommended it to everyone i know and it's an honor to recommend it to you all. i hope that you will appreciate it - as hard as it may be to read at times.
i decided to re-read the book with the anniversary of September 11th approaching next week, and hope you'll join me in grabbing a copy. these women have made me laugh and cry. they've inspired me to get over fears and hangups and appreciate little moments that would otherwise pass me by. i look forward to hearing your feedback on it!
Wednesday, September 5, 2007
Sunday, August 5, 2007
How is Cal's experience living within two genders similar to the immigrant experience of living within two cultures? How is it different?
Cal is constantly torn in two. She has known for a long time that she is very different from other kids, but yet she holds it inside, keeping it a secret that she alone is left to bear.
As an immigrant, I am sure at times you feel lonely as well, and feel isolated from those around you. You strive so hard to hold on to your own culture without giving up your previous identity altogether.
Cal at the end has to choose to give up her identity just as an immigrant would do. However, Cal's change was abrupt and decisive while an immigrant probably has more opportunities to ease into the changes at their own pace.
For both an immigrant and for Cal, there is one leg in the door of one life and perhaps only a finger in the door for the other, and eventually your whole body needs to go through in order to be at peace with yourself.
I think either situation would be hard, but I feel especially for Cal as hers is a road that mostly has to be travelled alone. All of her friends and family had to be cast aside for a spell in order for her to find herself. Desdemona and Lefty at least have each other for the transition and they are able to collect more family along the way.
Actually, it seems as though Cal is the only family member who has to completely leave her family in order to discover her identity. The other members of her family seem to be unable to branch out, even when looking for their life partners in marriage.
As an immigrant, I am sure at times you feel lonely as well, and feel isolated from those around you. You strive so hard to hold on to your own culture without giving up your previous identity altogether.
Cal at the end has to choose to give up her identity just as an immigrant would do. However, Cal's change was abrupt and decisive while an immigrant probably has more opportunities to ease into the changes at their own pace.
For both an immigrant and for Cal, there is one leg in the door of one life and perhaps only a finger in the door for the other, and eventually your whole body needs to go through in order to be at peace with yourself.
I think either situation would be hard, but I feel especially for Cal as hers is a road that mostly has to be travelled alone. All of her friends and family had to be cast aside for a spell in order for her to find herself. Desdemona and Lefty at least have each other for the transition and they are able to collect more family along the way.
Actually, it seems as though Cal is the only family member who has to completely leave her family in order to discover her identity. The other members of her family seem to be unable to branch out, even when looking for their life partners in marriage.
Friday, August 3, 2007
MIDDLESEX: Book 4, Question 5: Why does Cal decide to live as a man rather than as a woman?
Before I attempt to answer this question, I would just like to state that I thought this was quite a challenging and provoking novel. To understand it fully, I should probably read the book several more times. This is not a genre I would normally choose on my own, but that is what a book club is about, isn't it? Thanks, Anne, for your choice this time, and for giving us an extra month to be consumed with this plot!
I was surprised, very surprised, when Callie read Dr. Luce's report of his findings and recommendations and he stated he knew the chromosomes XY indicated Callie was a male, yet he recommended the transition surgery to become a female. As Callie had gone along with so many experiences previously (the rape by her brother's friend, her mother's attempts to teach her to be a true girl with dress and role-following), I truly expected Callie to have the suggested surgery. My surprise came when Callie wrote the note to her parents, Tessie and Milton, that she was running away and staying a male. I was glad she was FINALLY being truthful with herself/himself.
Truthfulness was the HUGE issue in this novel: it started out from the very beginning with Desdemona and Lefty's deception of their marriage legality. When Callie was lying about her sexual preferences as a female, it almost got her "cut off" from the gender she was born with. Hence, she was following the family tradition of lying, not only to herself, but to the world at large. And she was only 14 at the time of this Dr. consultation, and one very confused person at that.
Why did Callie decide to become Cal? I think it is that the truth finally sunk in, and it was time to face it. The lies, the deception, the glossing over what is real and true is over. She/he needed to be true to herself/himself even though it would have lifetime ramifications and difficulties, especially when wanting a relationship with a life partner. I think the right decision was made.
I was surprised, very surprised, when Callie read Dr. Luce's report of his findings and recommendations and he stated he knew the chromosomes XY indicated Callie was a male, yet he recommended the transition surgery to become a female. As Callie had gone along with so many experiences previously (the rape by her brother's friend, her mother's attempts to teach her to be a true girl with dress and role-following), I truly expected Callie to have the suggested surgery. My surprise came when Callie wrote the note to her parents, Tessie and Milton, that she was running away and staying a male. I was glad she was FINALLY being truthful with herself/himself.
Truthfulness was the HUGE issue in this novel: it started out from the very beginning with Desdemona and Lefty's deception of their marriage legality. When Callie was lying about her sexual preferences as a female, it almost got her "cut off" from the gender she was born with. Hence, she was following the family tradition of lying, not only to herself, but to the world at large. And she was only 14 at the time of this Dr. consultation, and one very confused person at that.
Why did Callie decide to become Cal? I think it is that the truth finally sunk in, and it was time to face it. The lies, the deception, the glossing over what is real and true is over. She/he needed to be true to herself/himself even though it would have lifetime ramifications and difficulties, especially when wanting a relationship with a life partner. I think the right decision was made.
Sunday, June 10, 2007
question no. 14
Discuss the very ending of the novel, which concludes on the one-year anniversary of the Sterling High shooting. Why do you suppose the author chose to leave readers with an image of Patrick and Alex, who is pregnant? In what way does the final image of the book predict the future?
i confess, this was the aspect of nineteen minutes that i enjoyed least. i spent the majority of this book entirely caught up in the plot, literally catching myself with accelerated heart rate at certain points, unable to fall asleep or set the book aside until i'd at least finished the chapter i was on. there were a few parts i found to be a bit contrived, some of picoult's descriptive verbage somewhat prosaic. otherwise, though, the action of the story kept me moving forward with great anticipation.
and then came the ending, and for me, a bit of a letdown. the book is not a pretty story; it is not polite, or soft. it is a story of hurt and rejection, and for goodness' sake, people, a school shooting. and while there are repercussions for josie's actions, that alex and patrick are together and expecting a child just seems so entirely cheesy to me that i couldn't wrap my mind around it. nor could i disentangle myself from the drama of the final courtroom scene quickly enough for this perky, rapid-fire ending that didn't allow for much debriefing.
immediately upon completing this book, i was compelled to buy another picoult novel: my sister's keeper. i found that the plot was just as engaging, and i literally rescheduled my weekend to pore through it at a rapid pace until i finished it. and finish it, i did: in tears, which i haven't done in years. the ending was just as jarring, with little time for processing the dramatic twist that had just been spun on the story. it seems to me this must be a picoult trademark, then: that the dénouement be void of resolution, save for something such as a hopeful pregnancy, like a sloppy bow slapped on an otherwise-thought-provoking package.
what do you think, fellow bloggers and book club members? were you equally affected by the ending, or did you appreciate it? i'm curious.
i confess, this was the aspect of nineteen minutes that i enjoyed least. i spent the majority of this book entirely caught up in the plot, literally catching myself with accelerated heart rate at certain points, unable to fall asleep or set the book aside until i'd at least finished the chapter i was on. there were a few parts i found to be a bit contrived, some of picoult's descriptive verbage somewhat prosaic. otherwise, though, the action of the story kept me moving forward with great anticipation.
and then came the ending, and for me, a bit of a letdown. the book is not a pretty story; it is not polite, or soft. it is a story of hurt and rejection, and for goodness' sake, people, a school shooting. and while there are repercussions for josie's actions, that alex and patrick are together and expecting a child just seems so entirely cheesy to me that i couldn't wrap my mind around it. nor could i disentangle myself from the drama of the final courtroom scene quickly enough for this perky, rapid-fire ending that didn't allow for much debriefing.
immediately upon completing this book, i was compelled to buy another picoult novel: my sister's keeper. i found that the plot was just as engaging, and i literally rescheduled my weekend to pore through it at a rapid pace until i finished it. and finish it, i did: in tears, which i haven't done in years. the ending was just as jarring, with little time for processing the dramatic twist that had just been spun on the story. it seems to me this must be a picoult trademark, then: that the dénouement be void of resolution, save for something such as a hopeful pregnancy, like a sloppy bow slapped on an otherwise-thought-provoking package.
what do you think, fellow bloggers and book club members? were you equally affected by the ending, or did you appreciate it? i'm curious.
Wednesday, June 6, 2007
# 6
Josie and Peter were friends until the sixth grade. Is it understandable that Josie decided not to hang out with Peter in favor of the popular crowd? Why or why not? How accurate and believable did you find the author’s depiction of high school peer pressure and the quest for popularity? Do you believe, as Picoult suggests, that even the popular kids are afraid that their own friends will turn on them?
Middle school and high school are cut-throat. They were when I was a kid, and I have to believe they are even more so now. Forget about classes, teachers, and tests...the friends you make and maintain are what actually matter the most throughout these years. For those souls that find themselves without friends it must be nearly impossible to survive day after day in those long halls.
Is it understandable that Josie chose popularity over Peter? Of course. In my opinion, Josie wasn't rejecting Peter, so much as she was choosing survival. Already in the 6th grade she understood that her school days would progress much easier if she chose those who had the upper hand rather than the lower. She knew that life would be difficult with a friend like Peter--that she would be teased, ridiculed, and mocked on a daily basis. And based on this knowledge, she chose to take the path that would seemingly lead to less pain. The path that led to friends, boyfriends, designer clothes, recognition, parties, and most importantly...approval. However, in the end, one might argue that she actually experienced even greater pain in her role as the popular girl. The popular girl with the abusive boyfriend. The popular girl who felt alienated from her mother. The popular girl who didn't know who she was.
From the stories I hear from my nieces and nephews, read in the news, and watch in movie depictions, Picoult's portrayal of high school life is right on target. I am amazed by the things I hear kids say and do these days. Movies like "Mean Girls," reports of hazing incidents, and interactions with students in the City within which I work, all reinforce the ideas of class and social standing that Picoult alludes to. For many, life is all about what you have and how you look, and status and ranking are based on your possessions and the manner in which you can display them. We've become so consumed with vanity and materialism, and it is beginning to define who we are.
It would seem that the popular kids would feel secure in their places, but most must live with the fear that the same people who they gossip with about others, may one day turn around and gossip about them. In the quest to stay at the top, these kids know that they're willing to do almost anything to retain their position. What could that possibly mean if they get in the way of someone else's climb, friend or not?
I find it interesting to talk about these "high-school" popularity issues, as I see them everyday in my job, my family, and even my church. How do we teach children to value people when this harmful environment is perpetuated in many areas of our lives? How do we break the cycle?
Middle school and high school are cut-throat. They were when I was a kid, and I have to believe they are even more so now. Forget about classes, teachers, and tests...the friends you make and maintain are what actually matter the most throughout these years. For those souls that find themselves without friends it must be nearly impossible to survive day after day in those long halls.
Is it understandable that Josie chose popularity over Peter? Of course. In my opinion, Josie wasn't rejecting Peter, so much as she was choosing survival. Already in the 6th grade she understood that her school days would progress much easier if she chose those who had the upper hand rather than the lower. She knew that life would be difficult with a friend like Peter--that she would be teased, ridiculed, and mocked on a daily basis. And based on this knowledge, she chose to take the path that would seemingly lead to less pain. The path that led to friends, boyfriends, designer clothes, recognition, parties, and most importantly...approval. However, in the end, one might argue that she actually experienced even greater pain in her role as the popular girl. The popular girl with the abusive boyfriend. The popular girl who felt alienated from her mother. The popular girl who didn't know who she was.
From the stories I hear from my nieces and nephews, read in the news, and watch in movie depictions, Picoult's portrayal of high school life is right on target. I am amazed by the things I hear kids say and do these days. Movies like "Mean Girls," reports of hazing incidents, and interactions with students in the City within which I work, all reinforce the ideas of class and social standing that Picoult alludes to. For many, life is all about what you have and how you look, and status and ranking are based on your possessions and the manner in which you can display them. We've become so consumed with vanity and materialism, and it is beginning to define who we are.
It would seem that the popular kids would feel secure in their places, but most must live with the fear that the same people who they gossip with about others, may one day turn around and gossip about them. In the quest to stay at the top, these kids know that they're willing to do almost anything to retain their position. What could that possibly mean if they get in the way of someone else's climb, friend or not?
I find it interesting to talk about these "high-school" popularity issues, as I see them everyday in my job, my family, and even my church. How do we teach children to value people when this harmful environment is perpetuated in many areas of our lives? How do we break the cycle?
Question Three
A theme throughout the novel is the idea of masks and personas, and pretending to be someone you're not. To which characters does this apply, and why?
It is interesting for me to truly think about this question, interesting because I almost feel that the only person in the whole book who is not wearing a mask is the terrorist, Peter. He is the only person who is genuine, real, and who frequently exposed himself again and again. He was unable to mask his own identity, and this eventually triggered his demise.
Much as society pushes people to be "real" with one another, the one thing that they are afraid of is people being too "real." It is okay for a little kid to have the innocence and the ability to do and say what they want while 'grown-ups' laugh and say, "kids just say the darndest things," shrugging off the fact that this child is being 'real.' Peter reached the age early on where people were not able to shrug off his behaviors. They made fun of him because he didn't fit in with the norms that his peers had already created. God bless a little boy who is willing to beat to his own drum.
As far as the other characters in the book: Matt- wore a mask in order to protect his image. Image was everything to him. This is seen through repeated examples of Josie sometimes 'exposing' him with expressing a more lovey-dovey supportive side, Matt puts her down in order to preserve himself as he knows it.
Josie-wore a mask the older she got. She realized how fragile a balance it was for her remain in her social position at school. We can see this first hand in the way that she snubs Peter when she is around her friends, but when she is alone with him in the elevator and at the copy place she opens up and sheds the mask that she desperately wants to hide behind. I also find it interesting that she, like Peter, has a morbid, depressed side to her. Unlike Peter, she tells and expresses these feelings to no one, choosing instead to steal and conceal her mother's strong pills in order to one day make herself disappear.
The other smaller characters, Alex, Lacy, the detective and other characters also wears masks, not quite as definable as they are merely linked to the main characters, but masks none-the-less.
All in all, it is interesting to think what would've happened if more masks had been shed before the incident. I think that many true, genuine emotions, and feelings only started to emerge after tragedy occured. It is only then when relationships could be repaired and developed.
It is interesting for me to truly think about this question, interesting because I almost feel that the only person in the whole book who is not wearing a mask is the terrorist, Peter. He is the only person who is genuine, real, and who frequently exposed himself again and again. He was unable to mask his own identity, and this eventually triggered his demise.
Much as society pushes people to be "real" with one another, the one thing that they are afraid of is people being too "real." It is okay for a little kid to have the innocence and the ability to do and say what they want while 'grown-ups' laugh and say, "kids just say the darndest things," shrugging off the fact that this child is being 'real.' Peter reached the age early on where people were not able to shrug off his behaviors. They made fun of him because he didn't fit in with the norms that his peers had already created. God bless a little boy who is willing to beat to his own drum.
As far as the other characters in the book: Matt- wore a mask in order to protect his image. Image was everything to him. This is seen through repeated examples of Josie sometimes 'exposing' him with expressing a more lovey-dovey supportive side, Matt puts her down in order to preserve himself as he knows it.
Josie-wore a mask the older she got. She realized how fragile a balance it was for her remain in her social position at school. We can see this first hand in the way that she snubs Peter when she is around her friends, but when she is alone with him in the elevator and at the copy place she opens up and sheds the mask that she desperately wants to hide behind. I also find it interesting that she, like Peter, has a morbid, depressed side to her. Unlike Peter, she tells and expresses these feelings to no one, choosing instead to steal and conceal her mother's strong pills in order to one day make herself disappear.
The other smaller characters, Alex, Lacy, the detective and other characters also wears masks, not quite as definable as they are merely linked to the main characters, but masks none-the-less.
All in all, it is interesting to think what would've happened if more masks had been shed before the incident. I think that many true, genuine emotions, and feelings only started to emerge after tragedy occured. It is only then when relationships could be repaired and developed.
Nineteen Minutes
(Please excuse me for not knowing how to get the same effect as S with the questions in orange and larger font)
15. Shootings have occured at a number of high schools across the country. Did Nineteen Minutes make you think about these incidents in a more individual way than in a newspaper or seeing coverage on TV? In what ways did the novel impact your opinion of the parties generally involved in the school shooting...
At the time I was reading the book, the Viginia Tech shooting had just happened. When the killer was named, and his history was given - being an outcast from another country and never fitting in - it so reminded me of Peter. I didn't look at this killer the same way I would've looked at him before reading NM.
At first, I hated Peter and what he had done. But, as the story unfolded, and the reader was introduced to his father- the hunter, and his brother-the shallow, mean-spirited superstar as well as cruel classmates, I began to feel for Peter. The incident on the bus on the first day of school had me in tears - to think of that boy who could've been my son with the Superman lunchbox and the big kids throwing it out the window of the bus breaks my heart!
The author is masterful in telling the story of Peter's constant bullying, and how he truly "fell through the cracks" of the system. And how it all added up to a complete blowout/blowup/killing rampage after so many years. The reader gets it, and because of the many stories, you can't see Peter anymore as a cold-blooded killer, but as a profoundly wounded human being. He snapped and retaliated.
After reading this book, I think it is almost mandatory reading for teachers in all grade levels. To be on the lookout for an individual who is being bullied and outcast and to truly adopt a NO TOLERANCE policy could eventually make a difference in the life of the bullied, and save the lives of those who might've been killed, years later, in a rampage by an individual who is too far gone to stop.
15. Shootings have occured at a number of high schools across the country. Did Nineteen Minutes make you think about these incidents in a more individual way than in a newspaper or seeing coverage on TV? In what ways did the novel impact your opinion of the parties generally involved in the school shooting...
At the time I was reading the book, the Viginia Tech shooting had just happened. When the killer was named, and his history was given - being an outcast from another country and never fitting in - it so reminded me of Peter. I didn't look at this killer the same way I would've looked at him before reading NM.
At first, I hated Peter and what he had done. But, as the story unfolded, and the reader was introduced to his father- the hunter, and his brother-the shallow, mean-spirited superstar as well as cruel classmates, I began to feel for Peter. The incident on the bus on the first day of school had me in tears - to think of that boy who could've been my son with the Superman lunchbox and the big kids throwing it out the window of the bus breaks my heart!
The author is masterful in telling the story of Peter's constant bullying, and how he truly "fell through the cracks" of the system. And how it all added up to a complete blowout/blowup/killing rampage after so many years. The reader gets it, and because of the many stories, you can't see Peter anymore as a cold-blooded killer, but as a profoundly wounded human being. He snapped and retaliated.
After reading this book, I think it is almost mandatory reading for teachers in all grade levels. To be on the lookout for an individual who is being bullied and outcast and to truly adopt a NO TOLERANCE policy could eventually make a difference in the life of the bullied, and save the lives of those who might've been killed, years later, in a rampage by an individual who is too far gone to stop.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
