Ponderings

Well, since Ritsumei already posted a wonderful break down of the character list and summaries, I'll start with my thoughts and initial ponderings.

So far there are lots of things that I like about this book. I like the world that Louisa May Alcott has created in Little Women; such a wonderful family and home. I like the dynamics between the sisters. I was amused by the description of the King children and the pointed timing of it. After having spent the first few pages of the book detailing just how poor the March family was, yet concluding that despite it all, they were happy, I thought the stark contrast in description of the wealthy King children, "... fighting and fretting all the time, in spite of their money", (pg.5) was very telling of Louisa May Alcott's position on what brings happiness.

Overall, I think her characters are diverse and very interesting, with just the right touch of realisim thrown in so they are believeable. They're not super developed yet, but we've only just had a taste thus far.

One of the questions that we have over there on our list of questions to ponder is: "Does the author have an agenda" or "Does this book have a theme"?
I don't think the words "agenda" or even "theme" are quite the right word that I would use to describe the approach Louisa May Alcott uses with this book, I think "tone" might be a better word. But already I am definitely seeing a very strong tenor of Christianity in the writing of Little Women. (not that i think that's a bad thing or that i disagree with her clearly stated opinion of the goodness of it) Mostly, it's something I noticed. I rather like the unabashed way she clearly promotes an active Christian lifestyle (meaning the doing of service, the general improving of one's self and being happy with life even when it's not what is generally accepted as perfect) And I find it interesting how different that is from uses of that theme in more recent literature. I think Christianity and productivity is still a predominant theme in many books. However, I feel that today it is more likely that the approach to that sort of theme would be either laid out almost apologetically, or it would be the bash-the-reader-over-the-head-with-how-THIS-is-what-they-should-be-doing. Louisa May Alcott's approach is more matter of fact, almost understated; just another aspect of life at the March house. I think it probable that this is a result of the "Realism" movement that Ritsumei touched on.

I like it.

Poor but Happy (Little Women, ch 1-3)

Little Women
by Louisa May Alcott, 1868 & 1869

Somewhat autobiographical: Louisa & Jo are closely related.

List of Characters (in order of appearance):

Jo: Leading Lady. 15 years old, described as boyish, though she seems more awkward than masculine. Bookworm.

Meg: Jo's older sister, 16 years. Prim & a bit fussy, kind & mothering.

Mother/Marmee: A Christian woman in every sense of the word. Loves her girls.

Amy: Youngest of the sisters, a bit self-important, puts on airs.

Beth: Just older than Amy. Introspective, quiet.

Father: Away as a Chaplin in the Civil War. Sends letters full of love & wishes for the growth of his "Little Women."

King Children: Well-to-do acquaintances who are neither happy nor well-behaved.

Hannah: A servant in the March household, "considered a friend more than a servant."

Aunt March: A relative the girls make sheets for.

German family: recipients of the March family's Christmas breakfast.

Mr. Laurence: sends over Christmas dinner

Scrabble: The rat in Jo's attic. I wonder if he's autobiographical?? [shudder]

Ms. Gardiner:Throws the party Jo & Meg attend.

Sallie: A girl at the party

(Theodore) Laurie Laurence: grandson of Mr. Laurence. Hides in the same alcove as Jo & they chat then dance at the party.

Annie Moffat: Sallie's friend who invites Meg for a week-long visit to include a trip to the Opera.


Summaries

Chapter 1: It's Christmas Eve (how very seasonal for us to read this now!) and the March girls begin the evening by sitting around and complaining, but soon enough they find better things to do. They plan gifts for their mother, read a letter from Father in which he encourages them to be their best selves, which they resolve to do, and then the girls practice their play.

Chapter 2: Christmas morning starts out with gifts from Mother (a Bible?) and then they continue on with some unexpected Christmas service: they give their holiday breakfast to a family that's even poorer than they are. But the day continues in a jolly & festive vein. They perform the play and are given a lovely Christmas dinner by a neighbor that heard about them giving away their breakfast.

Chapter 3: Meg and Jo are invited to, fuss over, and then attend a dinner/dance party. Meg is much more at ease in this sort of situation, but sprains her ankle. Jo makes a mess of everything, but gets to know the neighbor boy, Laurie, who takes them home in his carriage because of Meg's ankle.


Initial Ponderings:

Mrs. March is a gem of a woman; a true Christian. Hannah's description says it all:

"Where is Mother?" asked Meg, as she and Jo ran down to thank her for their gifts, half an hour later.
"Goodness only knows. Some poor creeter come a-beggin', and your ma went straight off to see what was needed. There never was such a woman for givin' away vittles and drink, clothes and firin'," replied Hannah...

Although the girls (being ordinary mortals) are having a hard time with having such a slim Christmas, they do a right decent job of making their own fun without a lot of Things. -The gifts for Mother, the Christmas breakfast, the homemade theater, the resolve to be better women. These are all the acts of remarkable young women.


Other, Outside Stuff:

Found a literary timeline that places some books (not ours) alongside some historical events (I'm thinking BoC) and also mentions a bit about literary movements. It would appear that Little Women fits in nicely with their definition of the "Realism" movement, wherein authors wrote about ordinary, rather than extraordinary things.

Visitng the Book of Centuries

I'm going to put some information about Louisa May Alcott into my Book of Centuries.

I've discovered a cute little thing called "lap books" which is usually a file folder that's got some fun little fold-out parts that kids have written and drawn different types of information about the topic at hand. (I've only run into it in homeschool circles, but I'm not paying much attention to public school these days!) My but that's a wordy attempt at explaining lap books! Try some pictures. And a blog with some more sophisticated examples of lapbooks.

I'm going to put some information about Louisa May Alcott into my Book of Centuries using some lapbooking techniques. There's a whole bunch of different ways to fold your paper and that way I can get a little more information into a little less space. Which seems like a good thing since there's just not a lot of space for 100 years of history in a 2 page spread!

Proposed Reading Schedule

Little Women

Chapters 1-3: Read & post by Dec 6.
Chapters 4-6: Read & post by Dec 13.
Chapters 7-9: Read & post by Jan 3.
Chapters 10-12: Read & post by Jan 10.
Chapters 13-15: Read & post by Jan 17.
Chapters 16-18: Read & post by Jan 24.
Chapters 19-21: Read & post by Jan 31.

That's about half the book, so at this pace it's going to take a while. Let's start out & see if this schedule is realistic. Now that it's been written down it's looking a bit drug out. We'll have to see how it goes. This schedule would probably take us into March.

Approaching the Book

How do you want to do this book? Do we want to do things in a more orderly fashion - a set goal for a chapter, that sort of thing? Or do you want to just read & post our thoughts as we go along?

I was sort of leaning toward a more orderly reading. A chapter a week, 30 pages a week, what have you. Then we could look at those questions I collected in the side bar, or other thoughts the reading spawned. Maybe aim to do a post every week, excepting some holiday weeks, of course. Personally, I think I'd get more out of a more organized approach, and that way we might get several discussions of different elements of the book going on, as we're almost sure to notice different things.

What do you think?

Getting Back Into the Swing of Things

Right on! I am so in.

Now I just need to find a bookstore here in my new neighborhood so I can go out and acquire Little Women and get on the ball with reading. Maybe I'll just pickup a copy when I'm up at the parents' house this weekend.. hehe.

Yay for new books!

Little Women

Kate & I were thinking that it would be nice to take a break from all the Serious Nonfiction we've read and try a nice fiction book. We were planning to read Little Women by Louisa May Alcott next. I figure that we could officially "start" right around the 1st of December, if that's something that's going to work for those that want to participate.

America's Constitution: a biography

I picked up a book from the library, America's Constitution: a biography. I haven't gotten very far in it, but I thought that I'd post a bit from it here & some of my thoughts as we haven't been working on 1421 recently. (Speaking of 1421, do you want to go back to that, or move on, now that the wedding is done?)

Preface

America's Constitution beckons -- a New World Acropolis open to all. Ordained in the name of the American people, repeatedly amended by them and for them, the document also addresses itself to them. It does its work in strikingly clean prose (as law goes) and with notable brevity. Its full text, including amendments, runs less that eight thousand words, a half hour's read for the earnest citizen. The document's style thus invites us to explore its substance, to visit and regularly revisit America's legal city on a hill.

Acropolis. An interesting choice of words. I wasn't entirely certain what it meant, so the first order of business is to get a definition to work from:

Acropolis (from Wikipedia): Acropolis (Gr. akros, akron, edge, extremity + polis, city, pl. acropoleis) literally means city on the edge (or extremity). For purposes of defense, early settlers naturally chose elevated ground, frequently a hill with precipitous sides.

The Constitution, a "New World Acropolis." A bastion of defense. A well defended hill with "precipitous sides." It's a very interesting analogy for a document. What is it defending? What sort of precipitous fall awaits outside the Constitution? It will be interesting to see what the author has to say about this. The Acropolis is a monument, a wonder of the world. I think that the Constitution is certainly no less.

In a revelation to the Prophet Joseph Smith, the Savior declared, “I established the Constitution of this land, by the hands of wise men whom I raised up unto this very purpose” (D&C 101:80). Friend, Sep 1987, Ezra Taft Benson.

Perhaps the precipitous fall is the fall from Divinely Revealed freedoms into the more run-of-the-mill tyranny of ordinary governments. The loss of freedoms and rights our Maker intended for His children to have. President Benson was certainly clear that the Lord is pleased with the Constitution:

But we honor more than those who brought forth the Constitution. We honor the Lord who revealed it. God Himself has borne witness to the fact that He is pleased with the final product of the work of these great patriots.

In a revelation to the Prophet Joseph Smith on August 6, 1833, the Savior admonished: “I, the Lord, justify you, and your brethren of my church, in befriending that law which is the constitutional law of the land” (D&C 98:6).

I reverence the Constitution of the United States as a sacred document. To me its words are akin to the revelations of God, for God has placed His stamp of approval on the Constitution of this land. ibid.

America's Constitution beckons -- a New World Acropolis open to all. Ordained in the name of the American people, repeatedly amended by them and for them, the document also addresses itself to them. It does its work in strikingly clean prose (as law goes) and with notable brevity. Its full text, including amendments, runs less that eight thousand words, a half hour's read for the earnest citizen. The document's style thus invites us to explore its substance, to visit and regularly revisit America's legal city on a hill.

Most citizens have declined the invitation. Many could probably recite at length from some favorite poem, song, speech, or scripture, yet few could quote by heart even a single paragraph of the supreme law of our land, one of the most important texts in world history.

It's sad, but true. I recently became aware of my own Constitutional ignorance. Talking to others around me has revealed theirs, even to include the lady that was recently elected to the State Assembly! She had no better idea of what is in the Constitution than anyone else I've spoken to. Interestingly, her attacks on her opponent were particularly vicious where the opponent (who was well versed in Constitutional ideas and liberties) was championing limited government. Limited government and personal responsibility have become very unpopular ideas of late.

Reading this book is a step in my plan to correct my own ignorance. I feel that, given that nearly every prophet of the restoration as talked about the importance of the Constitution and the Divine origin of the liberties it secures, I should put some time and effort into getting to know it better, to understand the principles that the Founders were trying to put into practice. Clearly there is more at work here than just some good ideas that some smart men got together and wrote about 200-some-odd years ago.

Most citizens have declined the invitation. Many could probably recite at length from some favorite poem, song, speech, or scripture, yet few could quote by heart even a single paragraph of the supreme law of our land, one of the most important texts in world history. Lawyers, politicians, journalists, and opinion leaders converse fluently about legal dictums and doctrines that appear nowhere in the Constitution itself while slighting many intriguing words and concepts that do appear in the document. For instance, we rarely stop to think about what lay beneath the Constitution's promise of a "more perfect Union," or why the Founders required presidents to be at least thirty-five years old, or how the Fourteenth Amendment built upon earlier bans on "Titles of Nobility" when it made everyone "born" in America a "citizen[]." University professors who teach constitutional law often neglect to assign the document itself. The running joke is that reading the thing would only confuse students. The joke captures an important truth. Without background materials placing the Constitution in context, a modern reader may miss much of its meaning and richness.

I certainly would not be able (yet) to recite any of the Constitution. I'm still pondering what I would like to memorize. I may start with just the Preamble. There's so much in there. It does not surprise me at all that Universities neglect the Constitution itself, even in "Constitutional Studies" courses. The Constitution, to my reading, seems to be diametrically opposed to many of the popular ideas about government. We wouldn't want anyone to notice that our own government is operating outside of its authority, now would we! Of course not. If "We the People" were aware, I like to think that We would reign in the government, force it back to its proper place and size, and many who now enjoy power would loose it. Constitutional principle seems to be entirely missing from education, apparently at all levels! No wonder we have no Patriot-statesmen like George Washington or Thomas Jefferson in our day: we are not teaching the potential patriots the principles that would light the fire in them!

This book seeks to reacquaint twenty-first century Americans with the written Constitution. In the pages that follow, I invite readers to join me on an interpretive journey through the document, from its first words to its last clause. Along the way, we shall explore not merely what the Constitutions says, but also how and why it says these things. How did various provisions at the Founding intermesh to form larger patterns of meaning and structures of decision making? How did later generations of constitutional Amenders reconfigure the system? Why did the Founders and Amenders act as they did? What lessons did they deduce from the distant past and from their own experiences? Which historically available models did they copy, and which plausible alternatives did they overlook or reject? What immediate problems were they trying to solve? Which long-range threats and possibilities did they espy on the horizon, and which future developments did they fail to foresee? What material and ideological resources did they command, and what practical constraints did they confront? How and why did their political opponents take issue with them? Who got to participate in the various decisions to ordain and, later, amend America's supreme law?

These are some very interesting questions. I look forward to seeing the author's answers. Right now most of them are things that I have not previously considered.

The Constitution has given rise to a remarkable range of interpretations over the years. In the chapters that follow I offer my own take: This book is an opinionated biography of the document. For example, while I try to say at least something in passing about every paragraph of the document, I pay special attention to those aspects of the Constitution that are, in my view, particularly significant or generally misunderstood. Because readers deserve to be told about other views, this book's endnotes identify contrasting perspectives (and also, where appropriate, furnish additional elaboration). In a brief Postscript, I summarize the main areas where my method and substance are, for better worse, distinctive. For convenience, this book's Appendix contains the complete text of the Constitution, keyed to the corresponding pages of my narrative.

Too bad the main stream media doesn't preface its reporting with a similar disclaimer!

Our story begins -- where else? -- at the beginning, with the Constitution's opening sentence, conventionally known as the Preamble. This sentence bids us to ponder basic questions about our Constitution and our country. How democratic was the Constitution of 1787-1788? Did it bind Americans into an indivisible nation? If so, why?

--Pages xi-xii

Ponderings

Well, I haven't done a thing with our "assigned" book, but I've been reading nonetheless. And it's been making me think, and I've been meaning to post a bit about it.

1st book: The Secret Garden.

I read this book in school. Probably late elementary or junior high school. Likely both, actually. I liked The Secret Garden. It's one of the titles that was in that box that vanished. Anyway, I've replaced it now. Twice, actually. Seems that I picked up one at a thrift shop and one at Barnes & Nobel, but I couldn't tell you which one came first. That's probably why I've got two. Anyway, reading The Secret Garden is a much different journey the second time around.

Before when I read it, it was an enjoyable story, but it never was much more than a nice story. Now, I wonder things: what happens to Colin and Mary after the story? It's a pretty idealic view of them that's presented in the book. And a mighty remarkable transformation, all from nothing more than getting out and gardening. Having worked with troubled kids, I have a hard time with the abrupt cessation of Colin's tantrums. But that aside, the way that the book is written makes me want to think about myself, and the changes that I need to make. And this seems quite remarkable to me! I watch the things that change first in Mary, then Colin, and finally in Mr. Craven, and it seems like such a hopeful, encouraging thing: "Look here, see how far gone these three were, and they managed to change, so surely you can too." Seems to be the message in the pages of that book. It's very interesting.

The 2nd Book: The Well-Trained Mind.

I've read this one before too, though it's not been as long as The Secret Garden. I was going back over what Mrs. Bauers recommends for the study of History, and looking at her ideas for time-lines. She says:

The time line can be simple (birth and death dates recorded in red pencil, political events in green, scientific discoveries in purple, and so forth). Or it can be as complected as the student likes (adorned with drawings and cutout pictures: notebook-paper-sized inserts hung above or below a particular date to allow for expansion -- for example, a month-by-month account of the Civil War or a year-by-year description of Arab conquests of the seventh century). (Well-Trained Mind, page 271)

This, along with the interesting things she was recommending for kids to study, made me want to pull out my Book of Centuries and see what I can learn about History. I don't have any of the resources she recommends (yet), but I do have an Institute Manual on the history of the Church. It's got some pretty interesting stuff in there. They actually start with the Apostasy, and so I included a map of the area covered by the early church, added the date of the Nicean Council, and a few other early things like that. I'm using my scrapbooking pens, at least for now, to add a bit of color to the dates. It really does seem to make it more readable and easier to tell what's going on.

Ideas For a New Book

Seeing as we've been stalled on the discussion action, I suggest that we think about picking a new book to read. I ran across a website with a couple of likely possiblities here, or if ya'll have seen anything that looks interesting recently, we could do that to. Whadya think?