It was third time lucky for our last rendezvous of the year at Fox Street, Goodwood. Banjo greeted the six of us (well 5 if you discount his owner who he already knew) and we were all pleased to see he was operating on all fours. And now I'm trying to finish this para with the numbers 1 and 2 - oh yes, how about there was one late scratching (Cherilyn) and two earlier apologies (Barb and Margie P), while Mog was off to dinner somewhere. So numbers done, we got down to the words, where little books (ie around 300 pages) with big themes emerged as the motif for the evening.
We started with Julie's choice, The Reader by Bernhard Schlink - chosen after watching the film of the same name. The story was about particular events set in four different decades (1940's, 50's, 60's, 80's) with the characters Hanna and Michael taking centre stage throughout. The book started out as looking like a coming of age story for young 15 year old Michael, but it quickly left that thread dangling as the story moved us on further into the unholy trinity of shame, guilt and secrets.
 |
| Bernhard Schlink |
So there was much to discuss: whether Hanna exploited the younger Michael in their liaison (50's); whether Hanna was so ashamed of her illiteracy she couldn't spring to her own defence during the trial about her role in events in the 40's; whether Michael could have changed the outcome of the trial in the 60's if he hadn't kept secret about Hanna's illiteracy; and whether Michael's reluctant renewal of the relationship 20 years later when Hanna was still incarcerated was due to his past guilt and/or shame (80's).
We enthusiastically explored these 'whethers' with 'yes-buts'. Yes, Hanna did exploit the young 15 year old (you're wrong Kate Winslet) - but then the age of consent was 14 back then. And no, she didn't because Michael was a very willing participant and the 50's were different times. Yes Hanna was ashamed of her illiteracy and couldn't present her own defence because of this - but no she couldn't see that her role in the events upon which her trial was based was morally unacceptable anyway. But then, while her moral compass may have been askew, so perhaps was her mental capacity - (from Julie's research you can read more about that here https://jaapl.org/content/37/3/427). But surely, Michael's failure to do anything at the time of the trial was immoral too - and yes it was a deliberate choice he made at that time. Would it have made a difference? Perhaps not in the 60's - but is that an excuse? Nevertheless it did appear to be the reason he came to visit Hanna 20 years later in prison and decide to reconnect with her - albeit mainly via tape recorder.
Was there a resolution at the end? The tin and money scene could have been but it is difficult to say - because sitting over the top of all these 'whethers' and 'yes-buts' was the big moral dilemma posed by the book - can the guilty ever find atonement for the past? It was in this vein that the big under story of the book poked through - the collective guilt of Germany for atrocities in WW2. We pondered on what Michael did in the end to try and atone, which was probably his best - yet was it good enough/not good enough?; but all agreed how important it is for authors like BS and the next generation to keep writing about this period (especially in this day and age).
So we were all of one mind in agreeing this was an excellent book choice - well written, focussed, posed many complex questions and overall was enjoyed by all as a great read.
Not so much for the next book however - The Promise by Damon Galgut. Clearly many of our readers didn't think it lived up to its title. The winner of the Booker Prize in 2021, it was the story of the unravelling of a South African post colonial white family, set against the backdrop of the unravelling of the emerging black republic of South Africa. Sometimes it was hard to tell which unravelling was at the centre of the book - though some might say this doesn't matter so much because the big theme was concerned with the lasting and devastating effect of colonialism (read the English and Dutch) on the emerging black republic.
Amor was the only Swart character any of our readers felt connected to, with the other members of the family falling apart before our eyes on the pages - racial prejudice, social climbing, moral turpitude, privilege, and class distinction all playing a part. So as the family members disintegrated and died one by one (all by some type of misadventure), only Amor was left to fulfil the promise made by her father to her mother (on her mother's deathbed) 30 years earlier. But then, by the time it came to fulfil the promise, it was too late - and that also seems to be the message from the author about the emerging black republic. How hard is it to give up privilege? And can it ever be forgiven? It was pessimistic, dark, and difficult to read - yes - but important - some thought.
Anticipating a lively chat about the book, here are the 2 opposing reviews of the book brought to the meeting
The good review - https://harvardreview.org/book-review/the-promise/
The bad review - https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v43/n21/adam-mars-jones/orificial-events (its a long read)
Some concluding remarks then: both books were serious and interesting in 2 ways. Firstly, they both looked backwards and made the reader think about judging the books' characters from the choices they made. Should we judge them from the privileged position of hindsight - or the context at the time: and does that make us reflect on how we would have acted at the time? And secondly, neither book offered simple alternatives - their moral nuance made the reader really think - and thats a good reason to keep reading (though being an enjoyable read is useful too!).
To lighten the evening the mince pies and little cheesecakes came out, and we reflected on the years reading list with The Lincoln Highway and Songbirds emerging as highlights, along with All My Mothers and probably The Reader jumping into this list at the last hurdle. Some holiday reading was suggested (anyone please add to the list)
- The Night Watchman - Louise Erdrich: 2021 Pulitzer Prize winner for fiction
- The Island of Missing Trees - Elif Shafak: a recommendation from last meeting also, and I'm sure Barb would add with anything written by Elif Shafak (if I recall)
- The Russian Wife - Barry Maitland: if you're after a light read its a page turning detective novel by an australian architect
- The Homecoming - Bernhard Schlink: if you're interested in following the author on another journey into German guilt its available from Sue's lending library
- The Reader on the 6.27 - Jean-Paul Didierlaurant: a late starter from Barb who fessed up she had read the wrong Reader but recommended the one she did read (twice)!
- Wednesday 1st March - Cherilyn and Barb
- Wednesday 3rd May - Mog and Cherrie
- Wednesday 5th July - Megan and Kathy
- Wednesday 6 September - McLassie and McMargie
- Wednesday 1 November - Sue and Julie
And here's an unsolicited suggestion if anyone gets down this far. To resuscitate the F bit, if you think there is a film worth seeing on the other first Wednesdays of the months in 2023 -
- Wednesday 5th April
- Wednesday 7 June
- Wednesday 2 August
- Wednesday 4 October
- maybe even Wednesday 1st February and Wednesday 6th December
