Hello, Beautiful, by Ann Napolitano

by

Families. They can be great or not. They don’t mean to hurt you, but too often they do. In Napolitano’s 2023 novel, William Waters was raised without love or attention, his parents having withdrawn into silence after the death of his three-year-old sister when he was only six days old.

He finds respite and respect on the basketball court, and friends among his teammates. At college, on a sports scholarship at Northwestern, he meets Julia Padavano, the oldest of four tight-knit sisters and is welcomed into their family. Julia’s father calls her a rocket: she knows what she wants and won’t let anything get in the way. William is a welcome and malleable companion, happy to have her tell him what to do.

When he suffers a career-ending injury, he begins a descent into darkness. His teammates and the Padavanos stand by him. Still, these relationships—between William and those around him, between the Padavano sisters, between their parents—are challenged as the story unfolds.

I’d been told this novel, loosely based on Louisa May Alcott’s Little Women and infused with Walt Whitman’s poetry, was a tear-jerker. For me, not so much. It was enjoyable for sure—certainly enough so to distract me from the news—but I found the characters too shallow to engage my emotions. Admittedly, this is often a problem for me with stories that have multiple main characters and multiple points of view.

The writing in some parts of the story, especially one long night involving William, is just amazing. I loved the descriptions of one sister’s murals and their effect on others. There were some parts that I questioned, though, such as the way William’s parents completely shut down. I was a little dismayed by the depiction of William’s teammate and best friend Trent who seems to be in the story only to provide him with unstinting support and love. As a Black male, Trent struck me as a riff on the mammy stereotype.

Kirkus, home to the Kirkus Prize and celebrated book reviews, places Hello, Beautiful in the category of literary fiction. A subject of much discussion among my writer friends, categories and genres have undergone many changes. It used be that fiction was divided between literary fiction and genre fiction, which included romance, mystery, science fiction, horror, etc.

As the books in these genres have become so well-written that they qualify as literary (as many of them already were, but that’s another soapbox), literary has become a catchall for everything else. New genres have been added to try to identify books that are well-written, but a lighter read, perhaps, than people might think of when they hear literary: women’s fiction, upmarket fiction, book club fiction. However, as you can imagine, there has been pushback against these new genres.

Defining the term “literary” is a discussion for another day. One of my book clubs, the one I’ve been a member of for decades, differentiates between difficult reads and lighter reads. We include both, of course, but like to mix it up. Some books just take a little more effort on the reader’s part, a little more attention. This novel was not difficult to read, which is a plus for many readers. Another plus is that it explores family and love in new and fresh ways. It’s won literary awards and been selected for Oprah’s Book Club.

Families are complicated. They can be wonderfully supportive. However troubled the relationships over the years, siblings are—or so my mother’s sister told me as she lay dying—the only ones who remember what you do. We also sometimes come to appreciate once-despised parents when we become parents ourselves. Not always, of course.

What I appreciate about this story is Napolitano’s deep dive into one family’s story, untangling the weeds and exploring different ways of being together.

What would you expect to find in a literary novel? What’s a story about families that you would recommend?

Before the Coffee Gets Cold, by Toshikazu Kawaguchi

by

People wander into Funiculi Funicula, a small café in a Tokyo alley and, charmed by its quiet atmosphere, become regulars. Almost unchanged since it opened over a hundred years ago, the café is mostly a haven for those who want to read or have a leisurely cup of tea or coffee. But sometimes people drop in who have heard the rumor that it contains a portal that enables you to travel into the past.

In this play-turned-novel, translated into English by Geoffrey Trousselot, four people decide to risk a trip into their past. And it is a risk. You are launched when you sit in a particular chair and Kazu, cousin of the current owners, pours you a cup of coffee, but you must return as the title says or risk becoming a ghost, like the woman in white who inhabits that chair most of the time, silently reading a book.

Another rule is that the present cannot be changed, no matter what the time traveler does, so you would think no one would attempt such a dangerous journey. Why twist yourself to obey all of the arcane rules and risk becoming a ghost when you cannot change whatever it is about the present that is making you unhappy? Why indeed do we pick over our pasts, write memoirs, visit psychoanalysts when whatever we learn does not change what has happened?

It seems like a thin premise for a book, and I expected a light read. However, Kawaguchi endows each of the four stories with subtle and surprising layers of emotion. The writing was a bit clunky in places: repetitive or explaining too much. Perhaps this was due to its genesis as a play. And without giving too much away, some of the women’s stories were annoyingly patriarchal.

Still, I enjoyed reading it and am left wondering which part of my past I would visit if I made my way to Funiculi Funicula. Would I want to enjoy once again a particularly happy time or attempt to repair a terrible mistake I now regret?

If you could travel into the past, would you do it?

The Equivalents, by Maggie Doherty

by

Subtitled A Story of Art, Female Friendship, and Liberation in the 1960s, Doherty’s fascinating new book tells of a “messy experiment” at Radcliffe College. President Mary Ingraham Bunting became concerned with what happened to the graduates of this all-women college. Since at that time women were expected to marry and spend their time caring for their husbands and family, these educated women were expected to give up their academic or creative pursuits, or reduce them to hobbies, in order to become what Virginia Woolf called “the angel in the house.”

Remembering her own career as a microbiologist–and now college president–while raising a family, Bunting created the Radcliffe Institute for Independent Study in 1960. Fellowships provided a stipend, office space, and a like-minded community to help women advance their careers as scholars and artists while also caring for a family. For a two-year period, the Institute would provide a fellow the prerequisites for creative work, as described by Woolf in her famous essay “A Room of One’s Own.”

Doherty concentrates on a few of the first fellows: poets Anne Sexton and Maxine Kumin, writer Tillie Olsen, sculptor Marianna Pineda and painter Barbara Swan. They called themselves The Equivalents per the Institute’s requirement “that applicants have either a doctorate or ‘the equivalent’ in creative achievement.” Her extensive research underlies this engaging story of five very different women and their creative journeys. And the book is so much more: a cultural history of the time, an in-depth look at creativity—what enhances it and what destroys it—and an examination of privilege.

I confess that it is the latter that most interests me because, after all, even in the 1950s and 1960s, while White women in droves were immersing themselves in being housewives, Black and working class women were already working while trying to raise a family. I appreciate that in covering the nascent second wave of feminism, Doherty includes the Black women’s movement. While acknowledging it isn’t “her” experience, she does examine the very real problems Black women had with what became the  mostly middle- and upper-class White women’s movement.

Tillie Olsen’s story provides a needed corrective to Sexton’s upper-class privilege and that of the others’ somewhat lesser privilege. Olsen was “a first-generation, working-class American, an itinerant, and an agitator” who said outright that “the true struggle was the class struggle.” After early publication and literary acclaim, she had been side-tracked by the overwhelming labor of house, family, and dead-end job. Eventually the author of the best-seller Silences, she was alert to all the things that keep us from creating.

The way Doherty sensitively examines these women’s different struggles and achievements lifts this narrative above the ghoulish interest in Sexton’s suicide attempts and the tendency to concentrate on those artists who have been anointed as important—almost exclusively White males at the time, or the handful of women championed by them—to look at a broad range of circumstances and personalities.

She acknowledges the privilege but goes deeper. As Olsen said, “There’s nothing wrong with privilege except that not everybody has it.” This is as true today as it was in the 1960s. Fellowships, grants, prizes are wonderful but not everyone has the resources—time and money—to pursue and take advantage of them. As a single parent working two and sometimes three jobs to support my family, my own writing career had to be mostly put on hold for years.

I highly recommend this book to anyone who is interested in the creative life and what can inspire or hinder it. It’s also a wonderful portrait of that era and of these remarkable women.

Do you have a room of your own?

The Boys in the Boat, by Daniel James Brown

by

Most people are familiar with this story of the rowing team from the University of Washington that won the 1936 Olympics in Berlin. A good example of narrative nonfiction, it is a well-researched, factual account that is eminently readable.

All the basic elements of good prose are here: the clarity of well-constructed sentences, good pacing through varying sentence structure, consistency achieved by presenting information in a logical sequence that the reader can easily follow. Beyond these, I want to point out a few methods that Brown employed to make it so absorbing a read.

One is that he centers the book on one character: Joe Rantz, a student from a working class background, left to fend for himself at a young age after his remaining parent abandoned him in the small town of Sequim, Washington. Recruited by rowing coach Alvin Ulbrickson, he attended the University of Washington; however, for him to aspire to a coveted spot on the rowing team meant competing against the privileged young men from expensive prep schools who embodied the elite image of rowing.

With a main character to root for as he confronts the physical challenges of competitive rowing and the psychological challenges of the U.S. class system, Brown begins to introduce other people of interest. One at a time—giving us a chance to get to know them before moving on—he gives us Ulbrickson, the head coach; Robert Mox, coxswain; Donald Hume, stroke; and freshman coach Tom Bolles.

Another way Brown makes the story so compelling is through making the Olympic race the climactic moment near the end of the book. Even though most readers know the outcome before starting the book, the suspense of waiting to see how it happens is immense. The suspense is fed by all the minor trials and setbacks, all the races against Washington’s main rival, California, and the Ivy League founders of the Rowing League, Columbia, Cornell, and Pennsylvania. Adding to the tension is the fact that the story takes place during the depths of the Great Depression.

These details are proof of the extensive research the author completed. The details that Brown chooses to include—the tip of the iceberg—serve the story by giving the reader a fuller picture of the time and the character’s motivations. In particular, the details about the construction of the shells are presented in context and in such a way as to fascinate any reader.

Three themes of the book adds to its hold the reader. One is the portrait of poverty at the time (though it’s certainly as bad as today in some areas). Joe’s struggle to get by as an abandoned teenager, as well as his and some of his teammates’ difficulty in coming up with the necessary funds, give the reader a better appreciation of the effects of the Depression.

A second theme is the difference between today and life in 1930s. Beyond economics, there is the relative isolation, with only radio and newspapers as media. The physical isolation comes through in the description of the trip to the East Coast to compete in the League championship. It is Joe’s first train trip and his first view of other parts of the country.

The final theme I want to point out is the context of the 1936 Olympics itself: Hitler’s Germany. The Berlin Olympics served Hitler’s goal of presenting Nazi Germany as a superior nation. Beyond hiding evidence of the Nazi’s abuses, the image of Berlin was meticulously orchestrated by propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels and filmed by Leni Riefenstahl as propaganda to prove to the world Aryan “purity” and Nazi supremacy. However familiar we may already be with this context, the details and the engaging way they are presented give us a deeper understanding of this early foray in marketing an image and a precursor of the horror to come. They also add further pressure to the U.S. team in the climactic race, as they strive to overcome the handicaps imposed by the Nazi organisers and beat their German rivals.

Narrative nonfiction occupies a particularly fertile middle ground between fiction and nonfiction. And it’s even more challenging for an author who must undertake the necessary research and abide by the limitations of accuracy imposed by nonfiction, while also employing the tools of a fiction writer. Brown ably demonstrates proficiency in all of these areas. This book deserves its accolades.

If you’ve read this popular book, what was your main takeaway?

The book review that helped me understand the haters

by

The lead article in the 4 January 2024 issue of the London Review of Books (Vol. 46 No. 1) began to sound eerily familiar. In “Say Anything, Do Anything,” James Meek reviews Pandora’s Box: The Greed, Lust and Lies that Broke Television, by Peter Biskind.

The premise of Pandora’s Box is that a series of daring, innovative shows on US cable channels, starting in the 1990s, blew away the anodyne output of the traditional TV broadcast networks.

Released from the censorship that delivered shows that were “lowest common denominator programming, comforting, predictable and morally neat,” cable channels began producing shows such as The Sopranos, Oz, The Wire, Dexter, Mad Men, and Breaking Bad. These shows were not only explicit in language and violence but featured “[a]nti-heroes like Tony Soprano, the man who garottes a fink while taking his teenage daughter on a tour of prospective colleges.”

While the movement from traditional TV shows to cable was supported by new bandwidth availability and an exponentially higher number of shows to choose from, Meek also identifies the use of algorithms to determine what viewing audiences want.

Netflix was a data-mining operation long before it got into streaming and [Reed] Hastings believed his algorithm could be used to predict the films and TV shows subscribers would like, whether they’d been made or not; if not, he’d make them.

And what did audiences want? Sports, of course, but also more nudity and lots and lots of violence. Thus, dramas like Game of Thrones became big hits.

I’m not a prude, but I am grateful that I can fast-forward through the endless nude scenes in certain dramas. Trained as a writer, I can’t help mentally wielding my red pen against gratuitous scenes that don’t move the story forward. As a woman, I can’t help suspecting these scenes are due in part to the misogynistic writers’ rooms described in Biskind’s book.

Look, I’m not here to rail against television. I have enjoyed and appreciated the craft of shows like Breaking Bad, Deadwood, and The Wire. In fact, the scene Meek calls out—”the almost loving meeting between the Baltimore drug dealers and childhood friends Avon Barksdale and Stringer Bell in The Wire, where each knows the other is setting him up to be killed”—is in my opinion the single best scene in any TV drama ever.

But I don’t idolise Stringer Bell or Al Swearengen in Deadwood or Walter White in Breaking Bad. They do evil things. I appreciate that they are presented as complex characters, instead of purely evil monsters. They have their own moral codes, a line they won’t cross. Meek mentions the save-the-cat device (per Blake Snyder) of making audiences like them by having them rescue a woman or child.

What gave me chills, though, were the parts of the book about the “significant fraction” of a show’s fans that cheered the violence, demanding more, and glorifying the characters because of their evil deeds. Meek mentions the “little old ladies” who fawned over Joe Pantoliano, Ralphie in The Sopranos. Pantoliano said, “‘They were flirting with me, turned on that I was the guy who beat up this hooker. It was sick.’”

Perhaps a little disingenuously, [David] Chase said later that ‘he was troubled by how much the “less yakking, more whacking” contingent of his fan base loved his mobbed-up characters, no matter how badly they behaved. The show is “about evil”, he said. “I was surprised by how hard it was to get people to see that.”’

Evil that becomes commonplace. Evil that becomes entertainment. Evil that becomes something to cheer on. Until some people don’t even see it as evil. They applaud when a would-be dictator, already a convicted criminal, threatens to use the power of the government against his political opponents. and respond “Kill them!”

Of course, I’ve long thought about the moral damage to viewers from the bullying and cruelty of reality shows that depend on elimination, whether by firing, being voted off the island, or whatever. This part of Meek’s review hit home for me because many of these shows I’ve watched and liked. I especially appreciated the nuanced way a good man like Walter White gradually, and for reasons that seem good to him, embraces evil.

I remember the flap over films like Bonnie and Clyde and Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid that glorified criminals. It seemed silly to think that watching them would make me or anyone else go out and rob a bank. I’m older now, and appreciate the more subtle ways that such things work upon our psyches. Also, that exposure a two-hours film is quite different from binge-watching five or six seasons of a TV show.

Still, I’m not advocating censorship. I’m just saying that the bloodthirsty viewers, the ones who adore their violent anti-heroes, remind me of the crowds these days baying for the blood of journalists, political opponents, immigrants—anyone they’re told to hate. I’ve been surprised by how hard it’s been to get them to see the evil in these demands. I guess I shouldn’t be. After all, they’ve been practicing this behavior night after nights in their own homes.

What TV dramas do you watch? Why?

Normal Women, by Phillipa Gregory

by

If you’re going to read the history of women in England for the last 900 years, then you can’t be surprised that it is a huge book. Long? Yes. Also, fascinating and infuriating.

Women have suffered ever since William the Conqueror brought his patriarchal ideas about the superiority of men over women to England in 1066, obliterating the more equitable society he found there. Sound like a generalisation? Read this book, where each assertion is backed up by example after example drawn from primary sources, starting with the Norman laws that dictated the so-called natural inferiority of women, morally, mentally, and physically.

Gregory’s extensive research yields statistic after statistic, example—by name—after example of women doing the work of society while having no power. She divides the book by eras and, within each presents a cogent description of areas such as the status of women’s health, marriage rights, widows, work (paid and unpaid), female soldiers, sexuality, slavery, rape, and prostitution.

Bottom line? Every time things start to look better for women, every time they are given a modicum of power, the immediate reaction by terrified men shoves them backwards. Think it’s all in the past? Look at how the percentage of rapes of women that are investigated by British police—already appalling low—have declined in recent years. If I remember correctly, the most recent figure in the book is from about ten years ago and is shockingly only two percent. Two percent!

Century after century, women are excluded from profitable work, from unions and guilds, from being able even to train for better work. All this while they are the ones feeding the family, more often than not. Elite women cheerfully throw their lower class fellow females under the wheels of their chariots.

A lot of this I already knew, but the tsunami of detail, of individual stories, really brought the horror of this persistent imbalance of power home to me. One area I hadn’t realised is that women were the true force behind the great resistance movements in England, the ones that pushed back against enclosure of common lands, automation, and other power grabs by the wealthy that left everyone else to starve. The Peasants’ Revolt of 1381 was sparked by two women from Kent, Joan Hampcok and Agnes Jekyn protesting a poll tax, not Wat Tyler, as the history books would have it.

If you think that 500+ pages of this would be boring, think again. There are surprises everywhere. Did you know that boxing was primarily a women’s sport in the early 18th century? Gregory writes with a cool attention to story, grabbing the reader’s attention and not releasing it. You cannot even turn away from her ten pages listing names of women murdered in Britain in 2019, nearly all dying from domestic violence. She tells us of the broken ribs and deformed bodies of women laced into too-tight corsets, of women colliers dragging coal out of mines like pit ponies.

She reminds us of how men of every period attempted to define women—quoting their very words—in ways that demeaned them and reinforced male dominion. All these unscientific theories of women’s nature spoke of her weakness of body, mind, and morals.

We are introduced to so many extraordinary women in these pages, but the author reminds us to look around us. “The history of women is a struggle over identity and inclusion: we are all ‘normal’ women even when we have been described as exceptional or deviant or inadequate, even when our vanity prompts us to stand apart, or our ambition to compete with each other.”

Yes, it’s a long book. You may want to pace yourself, though I confess that I tore through it. This is the book that I’m recommending to everyone this year.

Have you read any part of this remarkable book? What did you think about it?

The Personal Librarian, by Marie Benedict and Victoria Christopher Murray

by

I recently toured Ventfort Hall Mansion and Gilded Age Museum in Stockbridge, Massachusetts. Many folks might recognise it as the location used for the film of The Cider House Rules. I was intrigued because the house was built in 1893 for George and Sarah Morgan, Sarah being the sister of J.P. Morgan, and I happened to be in the middle of reading this story of J.P.’s librarian.

The tour was fascinating, with much detailed information and background. I was drawn to a display about the book and its protagonist Belle da Costa Greene, hired in 1905 as Morgan’s personal librarian to build and curate his library, and the first director of the Morgan Library and Museum after his death.

Belle, as we know now, was a woman of color passing as White. Even as a White woman, her being awarded this position shocked the male-dominated world of the early twentieth century. She went on to become fabulously successful. Intelligent, witty and well educated, she outmaneuvered others to acquire rare and valuable books for the library.

The authors have filled out the few records of Belle’s life to create a stirring portrait of this complicated woman. Her father Richard Greener was the first Black graduate of Harvard, a lawyer and professor who worked for civil rights causes all his life. However, her mother Genevieve decided that the only way for her children to succeed in a prejudiced world was to pass for White. To that end, she moved with the children to New York City and changed their name to da Costa Greene to bolster her claim of Portuguese heritage.

The accounts of Belle’s complicated relationship with Morgan, the enmity of his daughter Anne, and Belle’s adventures in the world of rare books keep the story moving. The real driver of the story, though, is her inner life as she wrestles with her identity and preserving her role, including leaving behind her birth name Marion.

Of course, we don’t know how the real Belle felt about any of it. This is historical fiction. However, its consistency and psychological acumen make it thoroughly believable. I have some qualms about books like this one that interpret the life of a real person, someone who isn’t here to correct mistakes. However, without such books, few of us would know about someone like Belle, long forgotten by history.

While the second half of the book dragged a bit as she goes from success to success, it is still an enjoyable read, and a good complement to Anderson Cooper’s Vanderbilt: The Rise and Fall of an American Dynasty, which I read recently. In Stockbridge, I learned a bit about its other Gilded Age “cottages” which, like the New York mansions in Vanderbilt, competed to outdo each other in size and excessive expenditure. And all, including Ventfort, were quickly disposed of by succeeding generations due to bankruptcy or lack of interest. Ozymandias indeed.

How do you feel about historical fiction based on real people?

The Girl Who Wrote in Silk, by Kelli Estes

by

Inara Erickson faces a difficult return to Orcas Island in the San Juan Islands. A childhood of wonderful summers visiting her Aunt Dahlia ended when her mother was killed in a car accident on Orcas. When Aunt Dahlia dies and leaves the large house and estate to her, Inara has to overcome her reluctance and get the property ready to sell. Then she can take up the corporate job her father has arranged for her, and make use of her new business degree.

 

However, she begins to fall under the island’s spell again and, while working in the house, finds a beautifully embroidered silk sleeve. She wonders who could have done this spectacular work, why it had been cut from a robe, and how it came to be hidden here.

 

In an alternate story line, a second generation immigrant in Seattle named Mei Lien lives with her father and grandmother above their dry goods shop until a violent mob ousts them. The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, reflecting the anti-immigrant emotions common once the Chinese were no longer needed to build the railroads, results in the mob bent on ethnic cleansing. They force hundreds of Chinese residents onto a ship captained by Duncan Cameron, supposedly to be sent to San Francisco and then to China.

 

This debut novel has a lot to recommend it. Based on true events, the descriptions of Mei Lien’s life are particularly rich. Everyone in my book club found things they enjoyed, such as the setting on Orcas Island, the detailed description of the embroidery, the deep dive into Chinese spirituality, and the historical information about the plight of the Chinese residents—so relevant to today.

 

At the same time, we were put off by the multitude of coincidences powering the plot, as well as some plot points that were just too unrealistic. Also, while we were captivated by the first part, our interest waned as the story began to concentrate on the two young women’s rather predictable romances. Most of us felt that, instead of a dual timeline, a novel about Mei Lien alone would have been something really special.  

 

Still, our curiosity about the sleeve and our fondness for Inara and Mei Lien carried us through, and we all concluded that we enjoyed the book and were glad we read it. I, for one, look forward to the author’s future novels, as her skills—already great—grow even more.

 

Do you like dual timeline stories? Can you recommend a good one you’ve read?

The Lighthouse Keeper’s Daughter, by Hazel Gaynor

by

I first heard of Hazel Gaynor through her partnership with Heather Webb. They are co-authors of a number of delightful novels, including Meet Me in Monaco about Grace Kelly’s wedding. Here, Gaynor again gives us historical fiction based on real events. In one of two braided stories, twenty-two-year-old Grace Darling helps her father operate the Longstone Lighthouse on the Farne Islands in Northeast England. The family lives there, as well as being responsible for the light itself.

My sister Thomasin used to say she imagined the stairwell was a long vein running from the heart of the lighthouse. In one way or another, we have all attached human qualities to these old stone walls so that it has become another member of the family, not just a building to house us.

When a terrible storm erupts in 1838, Grace and her parents are the only ones home, her brothers elsewhere. When the paddle steamer Forfarshire is wrecked on the rocks, she insists that she and her father should try to rescue the survivors despite the raging sea and high winds. That feat made her famous, to her dismay, bringing reporters, tourists, and portrait painters to their previously lonely outpost.

One hundred years later, nineteen-year-old Matilda finds herself banished to another lighthouse in Newport, Rhode Island, to spare her parents back in England the shame of her unwed pregnancy. The lighthouse is run by a distant relative, a grim, reclusive woman.

As Matilda tries to find a way to connect to Harriet, she becomes intrigued by the lighthouse itself and soon begins to learn about its history and operation. In a trove of family artifacts she learns about her ancestor, Grace Darling. She’s also curious about Harriet’s mysteries and secrets.

The 1938 New England Hurricane, one of the deadliest and most destructive ever to hit the United States, requires both women to summon reserves of courage and love if they and the lighthouse are to survive.

In spite of the hurricanes and other tragedies, this novel was the absorbing comfort read I was looking for. I couldn’t help but cheer on these women who worked so hard and set themselves such high standards. The relationships within the families and with those in the wider world were presented with nuance and depth.

I might have liked a little more development of some of the secondary characters, but that’s a minor quibble. There were a few anachronisms in each of the time periods, which gave me a chuckle.

Still, I treasured the insights about what it takes to operate a lighthouse in each time period, and the attendant duties, such as rescuing shipwrecked people. I had no idea that women had been lighthouse keepers, though—of course—why not?

Like Gatsby and Woolf’s Mrs. Ramsey, I used to live with a distant light, a lighthouse on the Chesapeake Bay that lit my bedroom and dreams for years. I once tried to swim to it. It seemed so close! But it was not; it was beyond my power to reach.

So Gaynor had me at “lighthouse.” Then came the bonus of just the sort of story I was looking for: one that held my attention, gave me a break from the anxieties of current events, and even taught me some things I didn’t know.

Have you read a novel or a nonfiction book about a lighthouse and/or its keeper?

Burning Questions, by Margaret Atwood

by

Subtitled Essays and Occasional Pieces, 2004 to 2021, this is Atwood’s third collection of essays, speeches, book introductions, and reviews. What astonished me was how readable this heterogeneous collection is. Of course, we have Atwood’s voice throughout: intelligent, calm, learned, self-deprecating, and witty.

In today’s world, where so many people value opinions and beliefs over fact, it is a huge relief to communicate with someone who actually believes in science. Both of her parents were scientists–an entomologist and a nutritionist–and she spent much of her youth in the woods of Northern Ontario. She talks about the family pulling over when an infestation was spotted so that they could collect the invading critters. “Other families stopped for ice-cream cones. Ours stopped for infestations.”

That early influence shows in her concern with the threats to our environment, both in her fiction and her nonfiction, including a number of pieces in this collection. She writes of how this concern fueled her Oryx & Crake trilogy and her MaddAddam trilogy, as well as a moving tribute to Rachel Carson, calling her “a pivotal figure of the twentieth century” and “Saint Rachel.”

Another theme that threads through this collection is the way autocracies try to silence writers and control women. She has been a force in founding Pen Canada and acted as its president in the 1980s. In “If We Don’t Defend Free Speech, We Live in Tyranny” she writes about the attack on Salman Rushdie and the murder of translator Hotoshi Igarashi. In another piece she states that “There is nothing that repressive governments desire more than imposed silence . . . secrecy is an important tool not only of power but of atrocity.”

She generously continues to write about The Handmaid’s Tale, noting that “absolutist governments have always taken an inordinate interest in the reproductive capabilities of women.” She adds that writing a dystopia from a woman’s point of view “does not make The Handmaid’s Tale a ‘feminist dystopia,’ except insofar as giving a woman a voice and an inner life will always be considered ‘feminist’ by those who think women ought not to have these things.”

These pieces are not all darkness with a glimmer of wit. In “Literature and the Environment” she writes that “as long as we have hope—and we still do have hope—we will be telling stories, and—if we have the time and the materials—we’ll be setting them down; because the telling of stories, and the wish to listen to them, transmit them, and derive meaning from them, is built into us as human beings.”

Indeed, the pieces I most appreciated were about how essential the arts are to our well-being and about writing in particular. Parsing out her approach to these short pieces taught me so much about her methodology. Often she starts with a clear statement of purpose: “I’ll divide my talk into three parts, and I’ll even tell you what they are, just so you know what’s coming.” That’s from a speech honoring the Department of Forestry’s centennial. I’m touched by how, despite her blockbuster status, she’s willing to turn up and speak at so many events.

After the statement of purpose, she wanders here and there in the best tradition of essay-writing. She includes asides, rhetorical questions, digressions, allusions. She explores the question without answering it, instead opening our minds—gently and respectfully. I also especially appreciated the pieces about other authors and about her late husband, author Graeme Gibson: both joyful moments and mor trying times as he drifted deeper into dementia.

While some readers may be unnerved by this collection’s length, diversity, and chronological structure (rather than thematic), I found it a joy to read. Most of the pieces are quite short, making it a perfect bedtime book: you can read a few pieces and chuckle at her quips before you turn out the light.

I’m grateful to Atwood for collecting these pieces—no small task—and putting them out for us to absorb. In fact, for a more global understanding of the issues facing us, their interconnectedness, and how we can move forward, this book cannot be beat.

What have you read by Margaret Atwood? Her novels, poems, and/or essays?