a wrinkle in time :: madeline l'engle

Title: A Wrinkle in Time
Author: Madeline L'Engle
Publisher: Dell
Read: September 2009, NYC
Format: mass market paperback

Meg Murry is misunderstood. As she contemplates how to fit in better at school and make life more bearable, something interesting happens. She embarks on an interdimensional adventure with her remarkable 5 year old brother Charles Wallace, the handsome and popular Calvin O'Keefe and a trio of unusual old ladies. Meg is motivated to go along on the journey in the first place because she desperately wants to find (and rescue?) her long-missing father. In pursuing this end, she learns more about her parents, the universe and, of course, her own abilities.

1) A Wrinkle in Time is one of the first novels I remember reading (4th grade, Miss Mallory's class). While I remembered some of the characters' names, I remembered NONE of the plot.

2) Even though I didn't remember much of the story, I did experience weird sense-memory of reading it over 20 years ago (gasp!). Images I haven't thought about in many years rebuilt themselves around me. It was a weird sensation and topical, really, given the whole time travel theme.

3) I was caught off guard by all Christianity references. I obviously did not remember that from childhood.

4) When I last visited him, my very clever nephew - 9.5-year-old Noah, also an avid reader - and I chatted about the book (I was just about to start it). It seems sometime in the last year or so he had attempted reading it, but found it 'too complicated'. I can see that. Some of the most interesting concepts (interdimensional travel, mind control and homogeneity, etc) in this book are, in my opinion, a little too complex for it's target audience. And, stripping these out, what's left is not that memorable. This is why I didn't recall any of the plot. I'd say that this series is ideally for 5th graders and above. A year can make such a big difference in what kids are able to process. Though, I guess when 1 year amounts to more than 10% of your life to that point, it makes sense. But I digress.

An excellent, comforting, interesting story. I look forward to finally getting to the rest of the series: 4 out of 5 stars.

Man in the Dark :: Paul Auster

Title: Man in the Dark
Author: Paul Auster
Read: August 2009; NYC
Format: kindle

August Brill, book critic, is an invalid. He lives a lonely life with with broken women: his daughter who has been left by her husband and his granddaughter who is mourning her boyfriend. Stuck in bed, August lays in bed all night and spins a story to occupy his mind. He imagines a young man, Owen Brick, who wakes to find himself in an alternate world where 9/11 never happened and where the liberal states have seceded. To get back to themselves, everyone must reorient themselves, explore their situations, and confront difficult challenges head on.

This is another one of those Auster novels with layered stories and layered meaning; where fragility, mortality, and loneliness are prominent themes. Man in the Dark is not my favorite, though. While it's not completely bleak, it is still too gray for my tastes and lacks the magic, mystery, or sweetness that the author can do so well. Instead, we get a heavy-handed suspense narrative couched within an exploration of sadness and loss.

A fast read and well-written, so not not worth it.

3 out of 5 stars

some thoughts about auster

I'm working on 3 back-posts for some Austers I read this year: Man in the Dark, The Brooklyn Follies and Oracle Night. Thinking about all 3 at once made me come to the following realizations:

• i possibly don't get it
  
• i should not read Auster on kindle. i end up reading too fast and don't take the appropriate amount of time to unpack it
  
• not fun
• maybe i picked the wrong three to read in the same summer, but the format seems pretty one-note
  
• i tend to read auster when i'm indecisive: i want to read something substantive, but fast. (lesson: when i want to read something quickly, i should probably just read something that is light too)
• i continue to read his novels, though often underwhelmed, because i'm looking for something more like Book of Illusions. seems like BOI really stands alone, style-wise.
  

aside

formal statement: i'm just not that into using oxford commas.

the kite runner :: khaled hosseini

Title: The Kite Runner
Author: Khaled Hosseini
Publisher: Riverhead (Penguin), 2003
Read: September 2009; NYC, Hartford
Format: trade paperback

Nutshell: In a cowardly move, 12-year-old Amir idly watches as his best friend and servant, Hassan, is brutally attacked. Racked with guilt, Amir can no longer face the angelic servant and drives Hassan and his family away. The shame of this two-fold treason haunts Amir's entire life - from his flight from the Afghani revolution to his life as an adult in California’s Bay Area. 20+ years after leaving Afghanistan, he is given the chance to atone. He returns to his homeland, but his path to redemption is not easy. It's unclear whether Amir is brave enough - even in his adulthood - to confront the perilous challenge.

Some thoughts:
- The novel is monotonously melancholic. Despite this, I was still riveted.
- There's an almost spoken quality about the way Amir recounts his story - it almost feels like the words are being read to, and not by, you.
- The sentimentality seems like it's aspiring to be poignant. It can feel a little heavy-handed.
- Amir's conflicted feelings for his father are more believable than the unresolved guilt he has about Hassan. Throughout his life, Amir fears and idolizes his father. He seeks approval and resents the fact that he must earn it. Hosseini does a good job of transferring this confusion onto the reader; I wasn't sure what to make of the father at first.
- I'm not sure what to make of Amir as a character. I feel that the shame that haunts him is a little overdone. I mean, I get that what he did was Not Cool, but he was like 12. His guilt comes off as whiney at times. Yet, at the same time, his love for Hassan is convincing. And, he seems to regret not being a better person. I go back and forth. Maybe that's the point.
- The backdrop of the Russian occupation and Afghani revolution provide rich context, but the political message is limited. Hosseini sets the scene with the gruesome reality of the time, but avoids the pitfall of preachy tangents.

Other thoughts (related to the book):
- I saw this movie on a plane like 3 years ago (I recommend it) so I knew what was going to happen. Obviously, this affected my reading. Still, I hung on the words, so that says something. That said, I think you can choose reading or seeing it. No need for both.
- While reading this, I was also watching HBO’s 2008 mini-series Generation Kill. It was a lot of war (different wars, I realize) to take in one sitting. Anyway, the combination really brought me down and probably tainted my overall experience.

I'm still trying to figure out how I feel about The Kite Runner. Mostly, I really enjoyed it. After all, it's well-written and emotional. But it's the emotion that gives me pause. Is Amir - and consequently the novel - too earnest? Maybe.

Touching, though possibly too sincere:
4 out of 5 stars.

the nine :: jeffrey toobin

Title: The Nine: Inside the Secret World of the Supreme Court
Author: Jeffrey Toobin
Publisher: Anchor, 2008
Read: August 2009; San Francisco, NYC
Format: trade paperback

Raise your hand if you love the Supreme Court. (raising hand).

Why exactly do I love the SCOTUS (inside jargon!)? Is it the appealingly nerdy mysticism that shrouds the Bench? Maybe it's that the judges are brilliant beyond my comprehension. The building and bench are in themselves pretty cool too: imposing, elevated, transcendent. I say, It's all this and more! In his The Nine, CNN legal expert Jeffrey Toobin shows that he agrees.

Depending on your POV (I guess), the tome is a left-leaning study of The Supreme Court from the Rehnquist Court through Alito’s appointment in 2005. Toobin guides a tour of the significant cases and peppers in thoughtful insights along the way. Of critical interest to him (and consequently the reader) is the evolution of the justices’ judicial philosophies, fascinatingly laid out through the judges' parsed opinions. Further, another stand out feature of The Nine's is its account of the Court beyond the docket. Humanizing and often amusing, these anecdotes make this otherwise dry topic a more engaging experience.

Miscellaneous facts from the book

The Lineup (per the book's timeline)

The Liberals
Ruth Bader Ginsburg (Clinton)
Stephen Breyer (Clinton)
John Paul Stevens (Ford)
David Souter (Bush #1)

The Conservatives
William Rehnquist, deceased (Chief, Reagan; Associate, Nixon)
Clarence Thomas (Bush #1)
Antonin Scalia (Reagan)
John Roberts (Chief, Bush #2)
Samuel Alito (Bush #2)

The Swings
Sandra Day O’Connor, retired (Reagan)
Anthony Kennedy (Reagan)

Factoids

• Consistently liberal Ruth Bader Ginsburg and incendiary conservative Antonin Scalia spend New Years' Eves with each other's families
• Many powerful Washingtonians, including Sandra Day O'Connor, regularly set David Souter (a lifelong bachelor) up on dates
• Sandra Day O'Connor had her clerks come into work early to participate in an exercise class with her.
• Roberts clerked for Rehnquist; was then the only SCOTUS judge to serve with the justice they worked under
• Clarence Thomas refuses to make commencement speeches or other appearances at Ivy League schools

Important Themes/Opinions/Controversies

• Roe v. Wade (duh)/Casey v. Planned Parenthood
• Right to privacy?
• Church and state/school prayer
• Affirmative action
• 2000 presidential election
• Stare decisis (honoring precedent)

It’s impossible to disassociate politics when considering SCOTUS and its decisions. Now more than ever, though, I understand that each justice has an underlying Constitutional philosophy to which they try to stay true. It’s not simply a matter of personal opinion and not just some arbitrary sense of right and wrong. Whether you agree or not, a justice's opinion on a given case is probably beyond sound if viewed impartially. The judges are tasked with interpreting the what Toobin aptly calls the Constitution's “majestic generalities”. Indeed. So majestic, in fact, that we need a special gang of impressive old people to help us understand it.

Obviously, I really liked the book. The one criticism that I do have is that it kind of loses momentum at the end. The pacing goes little off in the last section and the epilogue and afterword feel cobbled on, as they commonly do. Maybe it's unavoidable, though. How can you satisfyingly wrap up an account that doesn’t actually end? Regardless, it could stand a more finessed conclusion. This forgivable shortcoming is hardly a deal breaker, though.

Fascinating, informative and often entertaining:
4 out of 5 stars