I found this chapter a bit harder to get into, but I think I've finally made it.
There's a siege at Boston. George Washington was there, trying to whip the soldier into shape so they would not only be a useful fighting force, but also they'd stop getting so sick. Sounds like conditions were terrible in part because folks weren't being at all careful about where they went to the bathroom. Gross. Already folks are dieing, in large part because they are not keeping clean, as mostly they have enough food still at this point.
I think that the most interesting bit from the whole chapter was how King George, by saying the colonies were in rebellion, convinced them - the colonists - of that fact. Prior to that point, even General Washington himself was hoping for reconciliation and a quick end to the conflict. This was news to me, and I find it amazing. Take home lesson from this seems to be: watch what you say! It's still 7 years from the point that Britain recognizes America's independence, but that speech proved to be a turning point in that news of it caused the Americans to make up their minds, en masse.
05 July 2009
27 June 2009
George Washington
Let me just say, WOW this chapter is just jam-packed with information!! Mr. McCullough certainly can pack it in there :) But it's all good. I really like that the tone of the book isn't too text-booky (or maybe my tolerance for these educational sort of books has dramatically increased since high school), either way, I feel like the author does a good job explaining things and, for the most part, introducing the people well enough that the reader can get a basic idea and follow the story without any problems, even if they're not already a history buff.
I ended up looking up a couple words that I was unfamiliar with:
Remunerative:
and also,
Cipher:
So, in this chapter, we begin to get a real feeling for how dire the circumstances are for the American troops. They are appallingly low on powder, with little expectation of more. The troops are uneducated, unclean, and disinclined to accept orders they don't like. Initially, they were well fed (though price gouging came later), but with winter fast approaching, things looked grim.
In contrast, George Washington was the picture of order. He felt that it was imperative that the leader look and act the part. And while he was troubled by the condition of the troops and lack of powder, he never stopped trying to keep his and others' spirits up by reminding them of the goodness of their cause.
Much of the beginning of Chapter 2 is spent talking about the history of Washington and how he came to be the leader of the troops. Previous to reading this chapter, I really didn't know much by way of specific details on this man: He cut down a cherry tree but was honest.. he was a great leader.. a great president and the picture I have of him in my head comes from that painting Washington Crossing the Delaware River. Imagine my surprise when, through reading these chapters, I discovered that he was actually a bit of a dandy!
Ok, probably a more correct statement would be: he was a "Virginia Gentleman". He special ordered his clothes, his boots, his furniture, and the glass for his windows from England. He pretty much as "close to being an English country gentleman as was possible for an American of the day, and intentionally." In his time off between wars, he married a wealthy widow -Martha- and enjoyed very much the life of a plantation owner.
I found myself wondering what could possibly have made this man, who was so very much in love with England, become the leader of the rebellion against that very land? I didn't feel like Mr. McCullough satisfactorily answered that question, so I turned to some outside sources. First I read this article, that said:
In the latter part of the chapter, it discusses the war and the strategic planning by Washington and his various advisers. Washington, frustrated by the sitting around, proposed a couple ideas for attack, one including an assault on Boston that would most likely lead to it's being destroyed. His advisers tell him that such a course of action would be unwise and would likely not produce good results. So, he agrees to continue waiting. All the while the looming expiration of most of the army's contracts is growing ever nearer.
Then, on January 1, 1776, the transcripts of King George's speech finally reached the American troops. It marked a turning point as "clear as the advent of the new year."
What had sounded like a patriotic speech of determination, when it fell upon the ears of the English Parliament, served to have an opposite effect on the American troops. The result was immediate. Soldiers burned copies of the letter in public. Nathanael Greene wrote, in a letter to Samuel Ward in Philadelphia, recommending that a Declaration of Independence needed to be written.
Mr. McCullough writes that "The effect of the King's speech on Washington was profound. If nothing else could 'satisfy a tyrant and diabolical ministry, we were determined to shake off all connections with a state so unjust and unnatural. This I would tell them, not under covert, but in words as clear as the sun in its meridian brightness."
Even while thousands were leaving the army lines, substantial numbers stayed on. Washington declared a "new army, which in every point of view is entirely continental." And so the army finally had a name: The Continental Army. A new flag was raised, with a 13-gun salute. "When the British in Boston saw it flying ... they first mistook if for a flag of surrender." They soon would learn otherwise.
What an exciting culmination to the chapter! I am excited to read on :)
I ended up looking up a couple words that I was unfamiliar with:
Remunerative:
| 1. | to pay, recompense, or reward for work, trouble, etc. |
| 2. | to yield a recompense for (work, services, etc.). |
and also,
Cipher:
| 2. | any of the Arabic numerals or figures. |
| 3. | Arabic numerical notation collectively. |
| 4. | something of no value or importance. |
| 5. | a person of no influence; nonentity. |
| 6. | a secret method of writing, as by transposition or substitution of letters, specially formed symbols, or the like. |
| 7. | writing done by such a method; a coded message. |
So, in this chapter, we begin to get a real feeling for how dire the circumstances are for the American troops. They are appallingly low on powder, with little expectation of more. The troops are uneducated, unclean, and disinclined to accept orders they don't like. Initially, they were well fed (though price gouging came later), but with winter fast approaching, things looked grim.
In contrast, George Washington was the picture of order. He felt that it was imperative that the leader look and act the part. And while he was troubled by the condition of the troops and lack of powder, he never stopped trying to keep his and others' spirits up by reminding them of the goodness of their cause.
Much of the beginning of Chapter 2 is spent talking about the history of Washington and how he came to be the leader of the troops. Previous to reading this chapter, I really didn't know much by way of specific details on this man: He cut down a cherry tree but was honest.. he was a great leader.. a great president and the picture I have of him in my head comes from that painting Washington Crossing the Delaware River. Imagine my surprise when, through reading these chapters, I discovered that he was actually a bit of a dandy!
Ok, probably a more correct statement would be: he was a "Virginia Gentleman". He special ordered his clothes, his boots, his furniture, and the glass for his windows from England. He pretty much as "close to being an English country gentleman as was possible for an American of the day, and intentionally." In his time off between wars, he married a wealthy widow -Martha- and enjoyed very much the life of a plantation owner.
I found myself wondering what could possibly have made this man, who was so very much in love with England, become the leader of the rebellion against that very land? I didn't feel like Mr. McCullough satisfactorily answered that question, so I turned to some outside sources. First I read this article, that said:
Married to a widow, Martha Dandridge Custis, he devoted himself to a busy and happy life. But like his fellow planters, Washington felt himself exploited by British merchants and hampered by British regulations. As the quarrel with the mother country grew acute, he moderately but firmly voiced his resistance to the restrictions.Also, I found this one that goes into greater detail about the different actions (introducing proposals of boycotting, chairing meetings and being a delegate to the first Continental Congress), and between the two, I felt there was sufficient reason for him to have switched sides.
In the latter part of the chapter, it discusses the war and the strategic planning by Washington and his various advisers. Washington, frustrated by the sitting around, proposed a couple ideas for attack, one including an assault on Boston that would most likely lead to it's being destroyed. His advisers tell him that such a course of action would be unwise and would likely not produce good results. So, he agrees to continue waiting. All the while the looming expiration of most of the army's contracts is growing ever nearer.
Then, on January 1, 1776, the transcripts of King George's speech finally reached the American troops. It marked a turning point as "clear as the advent of the new year."
What had sounded like a patriotic speech of determination, when it fell upon the ears of the English Parliament, served to have an opposite effect on the American troops. The result was immediate. Soldiers burned copies of the letter in public. Nathanael Greene wrote, in a letter to Samuel Ward in Philadelphia, recommending that a Declaration of Independence needed to be written.
Mr. McCullough writes that "The effect of the King's speech on Washington was profound. If nothing else could 'satisfy a tyrant and diabolical ministry, we were determined to shake off all connections with a state so unjust and unnatural. This I would tell them, not under covert, but in words as clear as the sun in its meridian brightness."
Even while thousands were leaving the army lines, substantial numbers stayed on. Washington declared a "new army, which in every point of view is entirely continental." And so the army finally had a name: The Continental Army. A new flag was raised, with a 13-gun salute. "When the British in Boston saw it flying ... they first mistook if for a flag of surrender." They soon would learn otherwise.
What an exciting culmination to the chapter! I am excited to read on :)
10 June 2009
Don't Bother...
... with the movie. I got the movie Little Women, the one that got the best reviews, with Katherine Hepburn and everything. I was sooo disappointed!! I didn't even finish it. It's not that it was a bad movie, it just lacked the depth of the book. You lost the lovely interaction of Marmee with the girls, you lost many of her best teaching moments. You lost the distinction between "Little Women" and "Good Wives." Meg was making eyes at Mr. Brooks practically from the first time that they saw each other. And Jo. Oh my, all the acting seemed overdone, but Jo especially seemed over the top and larger than life. Even more than she was in the book. I guess I should have known better... I never like movies that I've read, and the more recently I've read the worse it always is. I specifically didn't read Lord of the Rings again before I watched those because I didn't want to spoil it. I should have known better.
29 May 2009
And so We Begin!
I must admit, I was a little jealous that your version had such fancy pictures! (heh.. see how serious i am about all this. i get all excited about reading a "heavy" book and then pout about not having as cool of pictures!) Then, I flipped a little further into my book and realized that I, too, have pretty pictures in an insert in the middle. Yay!
Alrighty.
I really don't know what I was expecting when I began this book. I admit that much of my interest in selecting this book was because I admitted to myself that the amount of information I've retained on this time period, from my bygone history classes, is embarrassingly little. So, understanding that it's WAY more complicated than this, my very vauge idea of what happened that I carry around in my head goes something like this: Big Bad Britain oppresses all its subjects; Brave Noble Settlers rise up and, against all odds, win their independence. Lots of wars... Important declarations.. Yay America... The end.
I really like that Mr. McCullough starts us of with a little peek at what's going on in England, pre-revolution; it was a new angle that, previously, I'd pretty much known nothing about. Our author's narration is definitely compelling. I agree with Ritsumei: the description of the procession was great; I really felt drawn into the story immediately.
I found, as I began to learn about King George III, I was very surprised. Perhaps it's the American slant on all the history that I've ever learned, but I'm pretty sure he's always been painted as the crazy bad-guy. With this description, he seemed very likeable; easy to relate to. He's a patriotic king. He's just trying to do his duty.. You almost feel bad for the guy since you know how the story of his trying to beat "the 'riotous rebels' of America" into submission will end.
I am very impressed by Ritsumei's dilligence in keeping up with all the name dropping that's going on. I did not keep such detailed notes :) However, I feel like Mr. McCullough does a reasonably good job throwing in a breif introduction of people whom he will talk more about further on in the chapter, so I wasn't completely lost as I read about all the action with Parliment.
The stuff with Parliement and the big speeches and lively debates between those supporting and those not supporting taking action on the (pre-labeled) insurgence in America. It was astonishing to think they'd argued until 4am!! And it didn't sound as though there were any fillibusters, it was straight arguing. That's intense.
Alrighty.
I really don't know what I was expecting when I began this book. I admit that much of my interest in selecting this book was because I admitted to myself that the amount of information I've retained on this time period, from my bygone history classes, is embarrassingly little. So, understanding that it's WAY more complicated than this, my very vauge idea of what happened that I carry around in my head goes something like this: Big Bad Britain oppresses all its subjects; Brave Noble Settlers rise up and, against all odds, win their independence. Lots of wars... Important declarations.. Yay America... The end.
I really like that Mr. McCullough starts us of with a little peek at what's going on in England, pre-revolution; it was a new angle that, previously, I'd pretty much known nothing about. Our author's narration is definitely compelling. I agree with Ritsumei: the description of the procession was great; I really felt drawn into the story immediately.
I found, as I began to learn about King George III, I was very surprised. Perhaps it's the American slant on all the history that I've ever learned, but I'm pretty sure he's always been painted as the crazy bad-guy. With this description, he seemed very likeable; easy to relate to. He's a patriotic king. He's just trying to do his duty.. You almost feel bad for the guy since you know how the story of his trying to beat "the 'riotous rebels' of America" into submission will end.
I am very impressed by Ritsumei's dilligence in keeping up with all the name dropping that's going on. I did not keep such detailed notes :) However, I feel like Mr. McCullough does a reasonably good job throwing in a breif introduction of people whom he will talk more about further on in the chapter, so I wasn't completely lost as I read about all the action with Parliment.
The stuff with Parliement and the big speeches and lively debates between those supporting and those not supporting taking action on the (pre-labeled) insurgence in America. It was astonishing to think they'd argued until 4am!! And it didn't sound as though there were any fillibusters, it was straight arguing. That's intense.
27 May 2009
His Majesty the King
I borrowed the illustrated edition of our book from the library, and this picture of King George (now in the public domain) was one of the first pictures in the book, preceded only by George Washington. I am sure that His Majesty the King would not have approved such placement, though of all the royalty that I have read about (not that the list is long), King George seems the most real. The least caught by the power of the throne, the closest to what would make, in my own mind, a good King. King George is definitely going to be making an appearance in my Book of Centuries.I love the description of the King's procession (and the picture in the illustrated edition!), though I've had to look up a number of the different things described: Horse Grenadiers, which are a sort of mounted infantry that fights with explosives, Royal Horse Guards (pictured below, right), and the Yeomen of the Guard (below left), who, it turns out, are the Monarch's bodyguards and the oldest existing British Military unit. In honor of this, they still wear the old Tudor style uniform. Today, the Yeomen are strictly ceremonial, though the Wikipedia article makes it sound like they were much more functional in the time of King George III.
.png)
One thing that I find terribly interesting about King George is that both 1776 and the Wikipedia entry for him paint him as a good and honorable man. Faithful to his queen, conscientious in his duties both as a King and a Father. I find it interesting that a man trying so hard to live in a way pleasing to God would be the man to preside over the American Revolution. Of course, just like there is more to our government than the President, there is more to the English government than the King.
As interesting as the King is there are other folks, both familiar and unfamiliar to me, mentioned in this chapter. Here is a selection, though I find that Kate is right and there are a LOT of guys just mentioned around here!
Lord Sandwich, First Lord of the Admiralty, yes, that Lord Sandwich. Turns out that the Sandwich Islands (now Hawaii) were named after him. Lord Sandwich was confident of the defeat of the colonists, saying they were "raw, undisciplined, cowardly men.(Page 19, illus. ed.)"
James Grant, Laird of Ballindalloch (General James Grant in our book), a Scottish lord and member of the House of Commons, former Governor of Florida, and an officer during the French and Indian War. He also fought in the Caribbean in the Seven Years' War. The thing that I find interesting about him is that he had actually been to the American Colonies, and still boasted that "with 5,000 British regulars he could march from one end of the American continent to the other. (ibid)" Wikipedia expands on this claim, quoting him as saying that he could go from one end of the continent to the other and geld all the males. Nice guy, eh? He went on to create plans for Battle of Brooklyn, and Battle of White Plains, both British victories, but in both cases George Washington and enough of his army escaped to continue the war.
The colonies had their supporters in Parliament. These included John Wilkes, that is, John Wilkes, Lord Mayor of London, who appears to have been quite the character, in addition to supporting the cause of the colonies. Our book calls him "flamboyant;" he was thrice expelled from Parliament after he wrote a pornographic poem, and he had a reputation as a rake.
Edmund Burke, considered the father of modern conservatism, was another gentleman who weighed in in favor of the colonies. An interesting tidbit about him: Burke was Irish and Protestant, but his political enemies kept trying to get folks to think that he was Catholic (as some members of his family were) in order to disqualify him from public service.
After he talks about the people, he starts getting more into talking about the events. Here, I found that I needed a timeline. I added a bunch of the dates to my Book of Centuries, and brushed up on Lexington & Concord's "Shot Heard 'Round the World."
This is Battle of Bunker Hill by John Trumbull, one of his "history" paintings of the Revolutionary War. It's depicting the death of General Joseph Warren. It's included in the illustrated edition, and my first thought upon looking at was: war is a terrible thing.
McCullough mentions an "Olive Branch Petition" rejected by His Majesty, but says very little about it. I found this article at Wikipedia, in addition to the full text. It's interesting to see how people talk to the king. Such bowing and scraping! Here is a sample:
Thus called upon to address your Majesty on affairs of such moment to America, and probably to all your Dominions, we are earnestly desirous of performing this office with the utmost deference for your Majesty; and we therefore pray, that your Majesty's royal magnanimity and benevolence may make the most favourable constructions of our expressions on so uncommon an occasion. Could we represent in their full force the sentiments that agitate the minds of us your dutiful subjects, we are persuaded your Majesty would ascribe any seeming deviation from reverence in our language, and even in our conduct, not to any reprehensible intention, but to the impossibility of reconciling the usual appearance of respect with a just attention to our own preservation against those artful and cruel enemies who abuse your royal confidence and authority, for the purpose of effecting our destruction.
So many times, things could have gone another way. A confidential letter from John Adams was intercepted and arrived in London about the same time as the Olive Branch Petition, undermining it. The King actually announced that the colonists were in a state of rebellion & seeking independence, before the colonial leaders themselves had openly said anything about it. Looking at all this with the Book of Mormon in mind, and the way that Nephi talks about the "Gentiles who had gone forth out of captivity" and their conflict with their "Mother Gentiles," I have always thought of the was as being a single event with a rather foregone conclusion, in spite of having studied US History relatively closely in high school. But it becomes apparent here that the conclusion was, at this point, far from foregone. These people all had their agency. Yes, the Spirit was working with those who would listen, and the final outcome was known to the Lord beforehand, but that's not the same as the "fated to be" view that I've often taken.
19 May 2009
Proposed Schedule
It looks like 1776 is about 200 pages shorter than Little Women, but the chapters are a bit longer. Last time we were doing 30-35 pages a week. Most of the chapters in this book are about 40-45 pages, except chapter 2, which is 70 chapters. Looks like the text is pretty readable, so I propose the following schedule:
Chapter 1: (17 pages) read & post by May 29. (1 week)
Chapter 2: (70 pages) read & post by June 12. (2 weeks)
Chapter 3: (50 pages) read & post by June 26. (2 weeks)
Chapter 4: (40 pages) read & post by July 3. (1 week)
Chapter 5: (46 pages) read & post by July 10. (1 week)
Chapter 6: (46 pages) read & post by July 17. (1 week)
Chapter 7: (48 pages) read & post by July 24. (1 week)
We could, alternatively, make it 2 weeks & 3 weeks for each chapter. Let me know what you think.
Chapter 1: (17 pages) read & post by May 29. (1 week)
Chapter 2: (70 pages) read & post by June 12. (2 weeks)
Chapter 3: (50 pages) read & post by June 26. (2 weeks)
Chapter 4: (40 pages) read & post by July 3. (1 week)
Chapter 5: (46 pages) read & post by July 10. (1 week)
Chapter 6: (46 pages) read & post by July 17. (1 week)
Chapter 7: (48 pages) read & post by July 24. (1 week)
We could, alternatively, make it 2 weeks & 3 weeks for each chapter. Let me know what you think.
18 May 2009
More Extra Discussion
My edition of the book didn't have any interesting questions in it, but I thought I'd take a couple from those we have listed in the left column.
How does the author's style contribute to (or detract from) the book?
Early on, we discussed how Louisa May Alcott wrote Little Women in the style of realism. I think that, overall, this was a benefit to the story. That style aided in making her characters more likable and, at least for me, made it easier to relate to them in their joys and trials.
I do think, however, that while her overall tone was in the style of realism, there was a definite rosy-hue to the story; everything always resolved very very nicely. Initially, when I read that final chapter where everything was amazingly, perfectly, and deliriously wonderful I thought that that was a little over exaggerated. But in rereading it, I've decided that it's not so far off. That was just a glimpse of one fabulous afternoon. Perhaps, while the day to day is often more gritty, I can think of days or occurrences in my life where things seemed just perfect. Plus, that seems a fitting end to our book.
What is the "moral" to the story?
I feel that this Ms. Alcott definitely had a theme to her book: be true to yourself, be true to those things you know to be good and true. And I don't think it's too crazy to say that the "moral" of the story is that one's life work should be to better oneself and those around you.
Are you going to change something because of the book?
Am I going to change something... Change might be too strong a word I think. I feel I like do pretty well with being focused on bettering myself (not that i'm perfect by any stretch of the imagination) and trying to become more like my Father in Heaven. I do think this book (while I may not agree with every thought portrayed, or theory presented) definitely has good examples and is a good touch of added support to that goal, and it helps me remember that it's good to have this goal. So, perhaps more than inspiring me to change something about myself, the book helps reinforce the choices I've already made.
I'm glad to have read it but, like Ritsumei, I am ready to move on.
How does the author's style contribute to (or detract from) the book?
Early on, we discussed how Louisa May Alcott wrote Little Women in the style of realism. I think that, overall, this was a benefit to the story. That style aided in making her characters more likable and, at least for me, made it easier to relate to them in their joys and trials.
I do think, however, that while her overall tone was in the style of realism, there was a definite rosy-hue to the story; everything always resolved very very nicely. Initially, when I read that final chapter where everything was amazingly, perfectly, and deliriously wonderful I thought that that was a little over exaggerated. But in rereading it, I've decided that it's not so far off. That was just a glimpse of one fabulous afternoon. Perhaps, while the day to day is often more gritty, I can think of days or occurrences in my life where things seemed just perfect. Plus, that seems a fitting end to our book.
What is the "moral" to the story?
I feel that this Ms. Alcott definitely had a theme to her book: be true to yourself, be true to those things you know to be good and true. And I don't think it's too crazy to say that the "moral" of the story is that one's life work should be to better oneself and those around you.
Are you going to change something because of the book?
Am I going to change something... Change might be too strong a word I think. I feel I like do pretty well with being focused on bettering myself (not that i'm perfect by any stretch of the imagination) and trying to become more like my Father in Heaven. I do think this book (while I may not agree with every thought portrayed, or theory presented) definitely has good examples and is a good touch of added support to that goal, and it helps me remember that it's good to have this goal. So, perhaps more than inspiring me to change something about myself, the book helps reinforce the choices I've already made.
I'm glad to have read it but, like Ritsumei, I am ready to move on.
Flourishing to the Finish
Heh, so here I am with my rather late installment :)
Chapter 45
I think it's interesting that we get such a detailed story about Meg's marriage, household and babies, and the other two's life events are sort of touched on, but quickly moved past. This was a cute chapter though.
Chapter 46
I thought that the scene under the umbrella was very sweet. It doesn't bother me nearly as badly as it does Rits that the professor is so much older than her, I just like seeing Jo, after so many chapters of her being so many scraps and down on herself and feeling so out of sorts with the world, finally find a place where she fits and is so very happy.
Chapter 47
I thought that the idea for the school was great; pretty much the perfect solution for Jo and her Professor. She's always had tons love and charity that she's never been able to really share or focus into something that satisfied her; now Jo has the perfect outlet for all her energy.
I think Rits summed it up best when she said, "The book ends with everyone deliriously happy." A fitting end for this book about people who've striven to be the best that they are able.
Chapter 45
I think it's interesting that we get such a detailed story about Meg's marriage, household and babies, and the other two's life events are sort of touched on, but quickly moved past. This was a cute chapter though.
Chapter 46
I thought that the scene under the umbrella was very sweet. It doesn't bother me nearly as badly as it does Rits that the professor is so much older than her, I just like seeing Jo, after so many chapters of her being so many scraps and down on herself and feeling so out of sorts with the world, finally find a place where she fits and is so very happy.
Chapter 47
I thought that the idea for the school was great; pretty much the perfect solution for Jo and her Professor. She's always had tons love and charity that she's never been able to really share or focus into something that satisfied her; now Jo has the perfect outlet for all her energy.
I think Rits summed it up best when she said, "The book ends with everyone deliriously happy." A fitting end for this book about people who've striven to be the best that they are able.
17 May 2009
Extra Discussion
My copy of Little Women has some interesting quotes and questions for discussion at the back. Here's the first one that caught my eye:
I don't think that I do feel that way. One of the quotes included comes from Louisa herself. She wrote in her diary:
Though the story is semi-autobiographical, I don't think that she set about to make us into herself. It seems to me that she was just trying to make some money. If there was anyone in the story that it seems to be encouraging us to be like, I'd have to say it's Beth, not Jo. Beth is the one that is always held up as a saint and a model girl. Or perhaps Marmee, with her gentle ways and quiet goodness. But Jo doesn't even seem to like herself very much, much less does the book seem to be asking the reader to become like her! She's forever criticizing the way that Jo does things, the way that she says things, the things that she thinks, and Jo, being Jo, gets herself into more than one serious bit of trouble. She's definitely the main character, particularly in Good Wives, but I don't think that there's any pressure whatsoever to become more like her.
It seems to me that rather than asking the reader to become like Jo, the story is more a story about how Jo becomes a better person. In the process of showing the reader that story, I often felt inspired to become better than I am now. Some of that was Jo, but just as much was Marmee, and the other girls were working equally hard to become their best selves.
On a completely different note, I ordered the 1933 version of the movie, with Katherine Hepburn, from the library. Hopefully Monkey will be interested in watching it with me.
Do you feel Alcott pressuring the reader, no matter how obliquely, to take Jo as a role model?
I don't think that I do feel that way. One of the quotes included comes from Louisa herself. She wrote in her diary:
"Mr. N. wants a girls' story, and I begin 'Little Women.' Marmee, Anna, and May approve my plan, so I plod away, though I don't enjoy this sort of thing. Never liked girls or knew many, exceping sisters; our queer ways and experiences may prove interesting, though I doubt it."
Though the story is semi-autobiographical, I don't think that she set about to make us into herself. It seems to me that she was just trying to make some money. If there was anyone in the story that it seems to be encouraging us to be like, I'd have to say it's Beth, not Jo. Beth is the one that is always held up as a saint and a model girl. Or perhaps Marmee, with her gentle ways and quiet goodness. But Jo doesn't even seem to like herself very much, much less does the book seem to be asking the reader to become like her! She's forever criticizing the way that Jo does things, the way that she says things, the things that she thinks, and Jo, being Jo, gets herself into more than one serious bit of trouble. She's definitely the main character, particularly in Good Wives, but I don't think that there's any pressure whatsoever to become more like her.
It seems to me that rather than asking the reader to become like Jo, the story is more a story about how Jo becomes a better person. In the process of showing the reader that story, I often felt inspired to become better than I am now. Some of that was Jo, but just as much was Marmee, and the other girls were working equally hard to become their best selves.
On a completely different note, I ordered the 1933 version of the movie, with Katherine Hepburn, from the library. Hopefully Monkey will be interested in watching it with me.
15 May 2009
The Final Chapters
Vocabulary
Conjugal: 1. of, pertaining to, or characteristic of marriage: conjugal vows. 2. pertaining to the relation of husband and wife.
Summaries
Chapter 45: Daisy and Demi, Meg & John's twins, get into a variety of scrapes. Demi also accidentally exposes Mr. Bhear's intentions toward Jo.
Chapter 46: Jo and the Professor finally come to an understanding that they each love the other. Sadly, they do not have the money to set up housekeeping at the present.
Chapter 47: Aunt March leaves her home to Jo, who then is finally able to marry the Professor, after more than a year of engagement. They move into the estate and open a boarding school for boys. Mr. Laurence kindly sponsors a few very poor boys, thus helping the Professor and Professorin to keep the place open and also to be able to give them a little extra money without it being an outright handout. The book ends with everyone deliriously happy.
Ponderings
I like the Daisy & Demi chapter. Demi is such a little toad, and those boys are so much fun to have around. I thought it was clever the way that the Professor's interest was brought to Mr. March's attention. I still wish that Alcott had made the professor 10 years younger, but it's not to be. In the end, Mr. & Mrs. Bhaer are happy, and the family is happy, and that's really all that matters.
Jo's idea for a school is really a fine one, and I think that it shows the quality of the woman for that to be her dream. It's nice that it turned out as well as it did for them. I thought the image of Aunt March's reaction to the use of her "sacred precincts" was priceless! I like to think that had there really been such a person as Aunt March, arriving on the other side would have been sufficient to teach her what is really important and that she might have (grudgingly) admitted that it was not such a bad use after all.
It's been a good read, but I'm definitely ready to be done.
Conjugal: 1. of, pertaining to, or characteristic of marriage: conjugal vows. 2. pertaining to the relation of husband and wife.
Summaries
Chapter 45: Daisy and Demi, Meg & John's twins, get into a variety of scrapes. Demi also accidentally exposes Mr. Bhear's intentions toward Jo.
Chapter 46: Jo and the Professor finally come to an understanding that they each love the other. Sadly, they do not have the money to set up housekeeping at the present.
Chapter 47: Aunt March leaves her home to Jo, who then is finally able to marry the Professor, after more than a year of engagement. They move into the estate and open a boarding school for boys. Mr. Laurence kindly sponsors a few very poor boys, thus helping the Professor and Professorin to keep the place open and also to be able to give them a little extra money without it being an outright handout. The book ends with everyone deliriously happy.
Ponderings
I like the Daisy & Demi chapter. Demi is such a little toad, and those boys are so much fun to have around. I thought it was clever the way that the Professor's interest was brought to Mr. March's attention. I still wish that Alcott had made the professor 10 years younger, but it's not to be. In the end, Mr. & Mrs. Bhaer are happy, and the family is happy, and that's really all that matters.
Jo's idea for a school is really a fine one, and I think that it shows the quality of the woman for that to be her dream. It's nice that it turned out as well as it did for them. I thought the image of Aunt March's reaction to the use of her "sacred precincts" was priceless! I like to think that had there really been such a person as Aunt March, arriving on the other side would have been sufficient to teach her what is really important and that she might have (grudgingly) admitted that it was not such a bad use after all.
It's been a good read, but I'm definitely ready to be done.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
