Okay, I see your point about the need for woman to woman relationships. I, for one, have never had trouble realizing that in my life. I've always NEEDED that friendship with other women. So, maybe that's why I didn't see it in the book. And you can't underestimate that quote about the bees only having males when required (sorry, poor paraphrasing). I do agree that the Zack & Lily relationship was quite tender. I got a real sense of their emotions both of love and of fear. Very poignant part of the book.
I guess this book just reminds me of The Ya-Ya Sisterhood movie (book). I guess I've always taken these types of stories to be more about the "no need for a man" philosophy than the actual friendship aspect because it's almost like these ladies become stronger by not having men (usually negative examples of men) in thier lives. It's like they're all seeking refuge from the men in their lives rather than having a healthy friend relationship ALONG with a healthy male relationship (but I guess that wouldn't make a very interesting book, would it?). Now, The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants - - that is a story about friendship.
Saturday, June 14, 2008
Friday, June 13, 2008
Wifehood--in response to Ju
I think Ju brought out an interesting point that never occurred to me while I read--that this book depicts marriage in an unfavorable light. In some ways you could say it depicts men in an unfavorable light.
But I don't really agree with that. My essay (if it ever materializes) is going to be about how this book really emphasizes how important it is for women to have strong relationships with other women. This took me awhile to learn and Marjorie Hinckley was the one who finally convinced me that I wasn't a heretic for needing more than my husband could provide. Women do need women.
However, just because the book embraces and celebrates women's relationships with each other doesn't doesn't mean it bashes intergender relationships. For example, Zack, Zack's lawyer friend, and June's fiancee are all strong, good, male characters. The relationship with June and her fiancee is an especially good one to bring up for this particular discussion thread because both August and May thought that June was ridiculous to not marry him. They both encouraged her to do so--as did Rosalee (okay, I don't have the book in front of me for spelling--if I was one of my students I would lose a grade for laziness), despite Rosalee's bad marriage and June's previous poor experience. None of the "Daughters" were dismayed in any way by June's decision to get married--they were delighted.
Also, nobody was against Zack and Lily's relationship--well, they probably worried about them a little, but not because of the boy/girl thing, more the black/white thing, and even then they all seemed to pretty much take it in stride.
Another point is that August tried to explain to Lily that T. Ray wasn't always a terrible, bitter person--that Lily's mother had a lot to do with T. Ray's current state of mind and poor behavior. She had fallen out of love with him, still married him, was a depressed wreck with him, and left him with their young child and orchard to cope with. August never allowed Lily to put all the blame on T. Ray's shoulders and that in and of itself demonstrates that the author didn't have a negative man bias.
As for August's choosing not to marry--I thought it was an excellent reflection of the time period. Men really did dominate in marital relationships until just recently, and quite frankly, if I had been an educated woman of that time, I would have hesitated myself. You were literally putting your life in your husband's hands with no legal recourse and no recourse to spiritual leaders, or probably even your family. Therefore, I can't really see that as anti-marriage so much as August making a choice that she felt was best for her.
Then again, it really never occurred to me either time that I read it that the author was in any way anti-marriage. Maybe if I read it again I might see it more, but I think she made the book pro-women with enough good male characters in it that it seemed realistic more than anything else.
But I don't really agree with that. My essay (if it ever materializes) is going to be about how this book really emphasizes how important it is for women to have strong relationships with other women. This took me awhile to learn and Marjorie Hinckley was the one who finally convinced me that I wasn't a heretic for needing more than my husband could provide. Women do need women.
However, just because the book embraces and celebrates women's relationships with each other doesn't doesn't mean it bashes intergender relationships. For example, Zack, Zack's lawyer friend, and June's fiancee are all strong, good, male characters. The relationship with June and her fiancee is an especially good one to bring up for this particular discussion thread because both August and May thought that June was ridiculous to not marry him. They both encouraged her to do so--as did Rosalee (okay, I don't have the book in front of me for spelling--if I was one of my students I would lose a grade for laziness), despite Rosalee's bad marriage and June's previous poor experience. None of the "Daughters" were dismayed in any way by June's decision to get married--they were delighted.
Also, nobody was against Zack and Lily's relationship--well, they probably worried about them a little, but not because of the boy/girl thing, more the black/white thing, and even then they all seemed to pretty much take it in stride.
Another point is that August tried to explain to Lily that T. Ray wasn't always a terrible, bitter person--that Lily's mother had a lot to do with T. Ray's current state of mind and poor behavior. She had fallen out of love with him, still married him, was a depressed wreck with him, and left him with their young child and orchard to cope with. August never allowed Lily to put all the blame on T. Ray's shoulders and that in and of itself demonstrates that the author didn't have a negative man bias.
As for August's choosing not to marry--I thought it was an excellent reflection of the time period. Men really did dominate in marital relationships until just recently, and quite frankly, if I had been an educated woman of that time, I would have hesitated myself. You were literally putting your life in your husband's hands with no legal recourse and no recourse to spiritual leaders, or probably even your family. Therefore, I can't really see that as anti-marriage so much as August making a choice that she felt was best for her.
Then again, it really never occurred to me either time that I read it that the author was in any way anti-marriage. Maybe if I read it again I might see it more, but I think she made the book pro-women with enough good male characters in it that it seemed realistic more than anything else.
Secret Life of Bees - Julia
I'm sorry, but I have to say I didn't really love this book. My #1 complaint is the negative portrayal of marriage. Lily had a negative view from T. Ray and her mother; August talked about loving her freedom more than the man she could have married; and June resisted it throughout (though she did get happy once finally making the choice). And, I'm sorry but I just didn't catch the symbolism of the whole Mary statue mumbo jumbo! Overall I just thought it was kind of an annoying book.
However, there was some great quotes that I had to share and I got some good thinking in on some subjects as well. First, some quotes:
"...people aren't meant to be overly bright in everything." (15) - - Truman G. Madsen has said, "Everyone is a genius at something."
"Children did not have two parents who refused to love them. One, maybe, but not two." (41)
"Some things don't matter that much...Like the color of a house...The hardest thing on earth is choosing what matters." (147)
"You have to know when to prod, when to let things take their course." (236) - - good one for parenting! :-)
"J.O.Y" - - Love this! The true way to have happiness is getting your priorities straight: Jesus Others Yourself
"Once you get stung, you can't get unstung." (167)
The Secret to Belonging
This book was yet another book about belonging and the meaning of family. Though it had a negative viewpoint of marriage (in my opinion), I was struck with the vividness in which the author portrayed the need to feel loved.
Connecting the bee life to family life, Kidd quoted, "Honeybees are social insects and live in colonies. Each colony is a family unit, comprising a single, egg-laying femail or queen and her many sterile daughters called workers. The workers cooperate in the food-gathering, nest-building, and rearing the off-spring. Males are reared only at the times of year when their presence is required." (67) Again, a hint of "no need for males, no need for marriage" in there; but taking that out, you find that bees work together as a family should work together. Getting things done for the betterment of the family must be a principle instilled in children. That sense of belonging strengthens as you work together.
"I wanted to make her love me," Lily says of August. "I wanted to make her love me so she would keep me forever. If I could make her love me, maybe she would...let me stay." (94) How often do we do things to "make people love" us? Whether it be in our friendships, our wards, or our own families, I think we all have a sense of needing to act a certain way in order to be loved. However, one of my favorite quotes from Rabbi Kushner states:
A lot of misery could be traced to this one mistaken notion [that] we need to be perfect for people to love us and we forfeit that love if we ever fall short of perfection. There are few emotions more capable of leaving us feeling bad about ourselves than the convistion that we don't deserve to be loved, and few ways more certain to generate that conviction than the idea that every time we do something wrong, we give God and the people closest to us reasons not to love us.
In short this is what Lily was struggling with throughout the whole novel. In her mind she heard, "You are unloveable, Lily Owens. Unloveable. Who could love you? Who in this world could ever love you?" (242) Why was she thinking this? Because she had the weight of killing her own mother on her shoulders. What a burden for a young girl to carry through her life. And yet, how many of those around us carry similar weight, for even smaller mistakes! How do we lift these burdens from ourselves? How do we truly gain a sense of belonging?
The answer: "Remembering is everything." (228) Allowing yourself to remember things - - to sorrow over mistakes, to remember the Plan that allows us to push past those mistakes, and remembering the joys that come from choosing the right and feeling the Spirit - - you can then move forward with a realistic veiwpoint of life and gain a true sense of belonging to something more grand than what life may offer. Lily discovered this truth. She was not able to move on and truly experience belonging until she allowed herself to remember, to cry, to mourn, to feel. "A wall of glass broke in my chest, a wall I didn't even know was there... [August's] hands rubbed my back. She didn't say, Come on now, stop your crying, everythings going ot be okay, which is the automatic thing people say when they want you to shut up. She said, 'It hurts, I know it does. Let it out. Just let it out.' So I did." (238) So I did.
However, there was some great quotes that I had to share and I got some good thinking in on some subjects as well. First, some quotes:
"...people aren't meant to be overly bright in everything." (15) - - Truman G. Madsen has said, "Everyone is a genius at something."
"Children did not have two parents who refused to love them. One, maybe, but not two." (41)
"Some things don't matter that much...Like the color of a house...The hardest thing on earth is choosing what matters." (147)
"You have to know when to prod, when to let things take their course." (236) - - good one for parenting! :-)
"J.O.Y" - - Love this! The true way to have happiness is getting your priorities straight: Jesus Others Yourself
"Once you get stung, you can't get unstung." (167)
The Secret to Belonging
This book was yet another book about belonging and the meaning of family. Though it had a negative viewpoint of marriage (in my opinion), I was struck with the vividness in which the author portrayed the need to feel loved.
Connecting the bee life to family life, Kidd quoted, "Honeybees are social insects and live in colonies. Each colony is a family unit, comprising a single, egg-laying femail or queen and her many sterile daughters called workers. The workers cooperate in the food-gathering, nest-building, and rearing the off-spring. Males are reared only at the times of year when their presence is required." (67) Again, a hint of "no need for males, no need for marriage" in there; but taking that out, you find that bees work together as a family should work together. Getting things done for the betterment of the family must be a principle instilled in children. That sense of belonging strengthens as you work together.
"I wanted to make her love me," Lily says of August. "I wanted to make her love me so she would keep me forever. If I could make her love me, maybe she would...let me stay." (94) How often do we do things to "make people love" us? Whether it be in our friendships, our wards, or our own families, I think we all have a sense of needing to act a certain way in order to be loved. However, one of my favorite quotes from Rabbi Kushner states:
A lot of misery could be traced to this one mistaken notion [that] we need to be perfect for people to love us and we forfeit that love if we ever fall short of perfection. There are few emotions more capable of leaving us feeling bad about ourselves than the convistion that we don't deserve to be loved, and few ways more certain to generate that conviction than the idea that every time we do something wrong, we give God and the people closest to us reasons not to love us.
In short this is what Lily was struggling with throughout the whole novel. In her mind she heard, "You are unloveable, Lily Owens. Unloveable. Who could love you? Who in this world could ever love you?" (242) Why was she thinking this? Because she had the weight of killing her own mother on her shoulders. What a burden for a young girl to carry through her life. And yet, how many of those around us carry similar weight, for even smaller mistakes! How do we lift these burdens from ourselves? How do we truly gain a sense of belonging?
The answer: "Remembering is everything." (228) Allowing yourself to remember things - - to sorrow over mistakes, to remember the Plan that allows us to push past those mistakes, and remembering the joys that come from choosing the right and feeling the Spirit - - you can then move forward with a realistic veiwpoint of life and gain a true sense of belonging to something more grand than what life may offer. Lily discovered this truth. She was not able to move on and truly experience belonging until she allowed herself to remember, to cry, to mourn, to feel. "A wall of glass broke in my chest, a wall I didn't even know was there... [August's] hands rubbed my back. She didn't say, Come on now, stop your crying, everythings going ot be okay, which is the automatic thing people say when they want you to shut up. She said, 'It hurts, I know it does. Let it out. Just let it out.' So I did." (238) So I did.
Friday, June 6, 2008
Julia's Milkweed Thoughts & Essay
First of all, I have enjoyed reading everyone's thoughts on Milkweed. By way of "disturbing for children" - - it, too, is hard for me to grasp what actually did happen during that time, but I have also always had a fascination with WWII and how it could have possibly gotten to that point! This book, for me, wasn't put on the top of my list of WWII books, i.e. Number the Stars, Devil's Artithmetic, and The Hiding Place; but Spinelli is not one of my favorite authors, either, so that may have been something to do with it. My favorite quote from the book: "When you own nothing, it's easy to let things go." (104)
Now for my essay (recognize I've got five children mulling around me at this time, but I have to return the library book today so it's now or never!)......
"You are what you are," Uri told Misha (22). Through Milkweed we learn of the desire of hope and belonging. Misha was on a search to discover himself. He starts off by introducing himself as the name given him, "Stoptheif," (3) yet in the end he still took on the title of what someone else called him, "Poppynoodle" (208). And yet through all of this Misha hoped.
Misha hoped for angels. Olek brought angels into Misha's life in the graveyard. Enos shot down those beliefs saying, "What are your angels doing for [Jon]?" (48) Then comes the conversation with Uri when Misha asks, "Is Enos right? There are no angels?" Again, Misha hoping for something that beautiful to really exist. Uri's answer struck me, "When you're nothing, you're free to believe anything." (49) Misha is starting to catch the glimpse of hope that it's up to him what he believes. Shortly thereafter he runs into a real life angel, Dr. Korczak, who makes the very stark comment regarding the orphans, "They're children...Children." (63) Dr. Korczak is first exposing Misha to the taking away of labels. Every contact Misha had with the orphans and Dr. Korczak only gave him more hope that there was a place to belong, the hope that being given a label was not who you had to be.
Misha hoped for a family. "We were huddled kittens, the bunch of us. We were voices in the dark. Often we talked about mothers. Though I could not remember mine, I had a pretty good idea what a mother was (again, the labeling). Not Ferdi. He was always saying, 'I don't believe in them.'...'Everybody has a mother,' said Kuba. 'Everybody.'" (87) Here we see the sparking interest of Misha in thinking about family, and belonging to someone. The statment that everybody has a mother gives him hope that this could be true for him. Thus we see Misha wanting to be a Jew only to belong to someone, to something, to anything! As the soldiers screamed at them the streets he suddenly felt a part of that something. "With my new armband, I thought: I am a Jew now...They're screaming at me. I am somebody." (94) To bring this closer to home, I think about those of us who try to please others just so we feel we belong, whether it be in our family, in our wards, in our schools. We all want to belong. We all want to be somebody. No matter the cost!
Misha hoped for happiness. "'Tata, what is happy?" (158) Can you imagine having your child ask this question? This just broke my heart! I loved Tata's answer. "Were you ever cold, and then you were warm? . . . That was happy." And then Tata teaching Misha that happiness is inside; again giving Misha something to hope for. This was just a poignant, touching part of the story for me.
In the end, Misha found all that he'd hoped for, in his own simple-minded way. He found his angel, his family and his happiness all through one individual - - Wendy Janina.
Now for my essay (recognize I've got five children mulling around me at this time, but I have to return the library book today so it's now or never!)......
You are What You Are
"You are what you are," Uri told Misha (22). Through Milkweed we learn of the desire of hope and belonging. Misha was on a search to discover himself. He starts off by introducing himself as the name given him, "Stoptheif," (3) yet in the end he still took on the title of what someone else called him, "Poppynoodle" (208). And yet through all of this Misha hoped.
Misha hoped for angels. Olek brought angels into Misha's life in the graveyard. Enos shot down those beliefs saying, "What are your angels doing for [Jon]?" (48) Then comes the conversation with Uri when Misha asks, "Is Enos right? There are no angels?" Again, Misha hoping for something that beautiful to really exist. Uri's answer struck me, "When you're nothing, you're free to believe anything." (49) Misha is starting to catch the glimpse of hope that it's up to him what he believes. Shortly thereafter he runs into a real life angel, Dr. Korczak, who makes the very stark comment regarding the orphans, "They're children...Children." (63) Dr. Korczak is first exposing Misha to the taking away of labels. Every contact Misha had with the orphans and Dr. Korczak only gave him more hope that there was a place to belong, the hope that being given a label was not who you had to be.
Misha hoped for a family. "We were huddled kittens, the bunch of us. We were voices in the dark. Often we talked about mothers. Though I could not remember mine, I had a pretty good idea what a mother was (again, the labeling). Not Ferdi. He was always saying, 'I don't believe in them.'...'Everybody has a mother,' said Kuba. 'Everybody.'" (87) Here we see the sparking interest of Misha in thinking about family, and belonging to someone. The statment that everybody has a mother gives him hope that this could be true for him. Thus we see Misha wanting to be a Jew only to belong to someone, to something, to anything! As the soldiers screamed at them the streets he suddenly felt a part of that something. "With my new armband, I thought: I am a Jew now...They're screaming at me. I am somebody." (94) To bring this closer to home, I think about those of us who try to please others just so we feel we belong, whether it be in our family, in our wards, in our schools. We all want to belong. We all want to be somebody. No matter the cost!
Misha hoped for happiness. "'Tata, what is happy?" (158) Can you imagine having your child ask this question? This just broke my heart! I loved Tata's answer. "Were you ever cold, and then you were warm? . . . That was happy." And then Tata teaching Misha that happiness is inside; again giving Misha something to hope for. This was just a poignant, touching part of the story for me.
In the end, Misha found all that he'd hoped for, in his own simple-minded way. He found his angel, his family and his happiness all through one individual - - Wendy Janina.
Thursday, June 5, 2008
Milkweed
Despite Andrea's assumption that I wouldn't like Milkweed, I did like it. I didn't like Maniac Magee which is the only other book I've read by Jerry Spinelli. I thought Maniac Magee was too preachy and rather improbable. Of course, that was my thoughts on the book back when I was in 6th or 7th grade. Anyway, I liked Milkweed for several reasons. I liked how it always stayed true to Misha's perspective. Personally, I wanted to hear more of Uri's story but I liked how you just get the little tidbits that Misha discovers about him. It makes it more real. I thought the writing style was excellent. I really thought the ending was appropriate as well. One of the most interesting aspectives of the book to me was Misha's search for identity and how readily he picked new identities as it suited him. I think it's true that everyone wants their place, their own bit of history to have a sense of self. (Which is probably why so many adoptees care so much to find their birth parents.) I think that's part of the reason we always hear so much church history, to give us in our church our own unique identity and past and cement us together more, which I I'm sure the long Jewish history does for many Jews too.
I did think it rather improbable that Misha could have survived on his own for so long that he didn't even remember his own name without coming into contact with other street urchins before then. I mean yeah, there are accounts of feral children and what not, but living in the city with other kids around him, I don't see how he could have stayed isolated for so long. Anyway, that's my one issue with the story. I do agree that I thought he was stupid at the beginning, but then I wonder where my 8 yr. old's head is most of the time so I think it's pretty true to life. (Sorry, that was mean of me--but honest.)
And just because Leo and I have been talking about it lately--it really has nothing to do with the story per se--but it made me think of the last days and food storage and that sort of thing. Well, to preface a little there is this guy in our ward who's a little carried away with the last days and tent cities and odd stuff like that. Anyway, it was suggested that we get a gun or pepper spray to protect our food storage. I think if it came down to that, I'd hope I'd be Christ-like enough to share it. I guess what I'm trying to say, is that you never know how you'll act in a crisis--especially one that lasts for years without hope for an end, but I'd hope I'd be like a Mr. Milgrom or Janusz Korczak.
Okay, these are all really random thoughts, but it's really, really hot in my apartment and I barely can concentrate. Sorry this is so pathetic of a response.
I did think it rather improbable that Misha could have survived on his own for so long that he didn't even remember his own name without coming into contact with other street urchins before then. I mean yeah, there are accounts of feral children and what not, but living in the city with other kids around him, I don't see how he could have stayed isolated for so long. Anyway, that's my one issue with the story. I do agree that I thought he was stupid at the beginning, but then I wonder where my 8 yr. old's head is most of the time so I think it's pretty true to life. (Sorry, that was mean of me--but honest.)
And just because Leo and I have been talking about it lately--it really has nothing to do with the story per se--but it made me think of the last days and food storage and that sort of thing. Well, to preface a little there is this guy in our ward who's a little carried away with the last days and tent cities and odd stuff like that. Anyway, it was suggested that we get a gun or pepper spray to protect our food storage. I think if it came down to that, I'd hope I'd be Christ-like enough to share it. I guess what I'm trying to say, is that you never know how you'll act in a crisis--especially one that lasts for years without hope for an end, but I'd hope I'd be like a Mr. Milgrom or Janusz Korczak.
Okay, these are all really random thoughts, but it's really, really hot in my apartment and I barely can concentrate. Sorry this is so pathetic of a response.
Tuesday, June 3, 2008
Milkweed
Kelly, great thoughts! I really enjoyed your essay.
You liked Misha a lot more than I did. I found him really annoying at times. Not as annoying as Janina, but still annoying. Maybe this just proves that I am not a great kid person. Love my own kids, but as a general rule, I find most other kids a bother.
My favorite character was Uri. First, he didn't have to help Misha. He fed him, took care of him, and tried to keep him out of trouble. I felt so sorry for Uri when he tried and tried to get Misha to understand how to act to stay out of trouble, only for Misha to do whatever the heck he wanted. Of course, Misha had been on his own as long as he could remember. He wasn't exactly trained up to be obedient. On the other hand, some kids just walk their own way. Wyatt was like that.
Back to the point. First Uri took care of Misha, then he warned him about the train, and then, at great personal risk, he helped Misha escape the train. All by choice--there was no family obligation. Another example of people creating their own families out of a need for a family.
Also, I think it is harsh to judge Janina's mother. The uncle became amoral and denied his faith and heritage. I find it easy to point a finger at him and call him weak. However, Janina's mother was not physically strong, and she did not have hope to sustain her. I can't really bring myself to believe that an inability to hope is weakness. Certainly the flip is true: that an ability to hope is a strength, but realists aren't necessarily weak. She crumbled, yes, but she did not become a "bad" person. I wouldn't lump her with the uncle--I think that is unfair. I would, however, lump the uncle with the Jews who worked for the Nazis against other Jews.
You liked Misha a lot more than I did. I found him really annoying at times. Not as annoying as Janina, but still annoying. Maybe this just proves that I am not a great kid person. Love my own kids, but as a general rule, I find most other kids a bother.
My favorite character was Uri. First, he didn't have to help Misha. He fed him, took care of him, and tried to keep him out of trouble. I felt so sorry for Uri when he tried and tried to get Misha to understand how to act to stay out of trouble, only for Misha to do whatever the heck he wanted. Of course, Misha had been on his own as long as he could remember. He wasn't exactly trained up to be obedient. On the other hand, some kids just walk their own way. Wyatt was like that.
Back to the point. First Uri took care of Misha, then he warned him about the train, and then, at great personal risk, he helped Misha escape the train. All by choice--there was no family obligation. Another example of people creating their own families out of a need for a family.
Also, I think it is harsh to judge Janina's mother. The uncle became amoral and denied his faith and heritage. I find it easy to point a finger at him and call him weak. However, Janina's mother was not physically strong, and she did not have hope to sustain her. I can't really bring myself to believe that an inability to hope is weakness. Certainly the flip is true: that an ability to hope is a strength, but realists aren't necessarily weak. She crumbled, yes, but she did not become a "bad" person. I wouldn't lump her with the uncle--I think that is unfair. I would, however, lump the uncle with the Jews who worked for the Nazis against other Jews.
Milkweed: a few thoughts
Milkweed
“Milkweed” is ultimately a book about survival. We discover that almost immediately when we realize that Misha, the main character, has been surviving as a street urchin for most of his life. He has no memory of home or family, and in fact does not even know his name – referring to himself as “Stopthief”. Which, of course, tells how he has managed to survive. Misha, we are quick to discover, is not a normal person – he does not view the world the way we do.
Through Misha's eyes, we view Warsaw during the Nazi reign of terror. I have never read a book about World War II through the eyes of an innocent such as Misha. The things he saw and thought were beautiful – the shiny boots of the Jackboots or the flames of fire they turned on the people – are normally portrayed as the horrible things that they are. Yet Misha did not sense the horror behind them. He had to discover it. And even then, he was able to remain happy and upbeat.
A favorite character in the book is Janina's father, Mr. Milgrom. Of the adults in Janina's family, Mr. Milgrom is the one who holds it together. I believe that when life gets difficult, the true nature of a person shines through. Janina's mother and uncle crumble. Mr. Milgrom is able to share with those that have less. He is patient with Janina and Misha. He shows his true character.
I felt that the saddest statement made in the book was Mr. Milgrom telling Janina (in response to Uri's warning about a train), “There will be no train. Uncle Shepsel is right. There is nothing else they can do to us” (171). I think part of the reason there was little resistance of the Nazis by the Jews and other good people at first, is that they just did not believe that what would happen, could happen. It is hard for a good heart to imagine the depravity that an evil person will consider. I think most of the world could not comprehend the immensity of what was being done by the Nazi regime. This incomprehensibility kept good people from taking action. Remaining passive in the face of aggressive wickedness allowed more to take place.
One of the characters in the book that greatly interested me was Janusz Korczak. There really was a man named Janusz Korczak who lived in the Warsaw Ghetto. Coincidentally, there was a Misha in Janusz's life; a teacher who was friends with Janusz. In doing a little research into Janusz Korckzak, I came across this statement made by the real Misha:
" You know, everyone makes so much of Korczak´s last decision to go with the children to the train. But his whole life was made up of moral decisions. The decision to become a children´s doctor. The decision to give up medicine and his writing career to take care of poor orphans. The decision to go with the Jewish orphans into the ghetto. As for that last decision to go with the children to Treblinka, it was part of his nature. It was who he was. He wouldn´t understand why we are making so much of it today. "
Knowing this about Janusz Korczak puts a whole new spin on the march of little orphans to the ghetto, and then later, the march to the train that would carry them to their death. It is incredible to me that during such a profoundly terrible time in human history, there were people who faced all adversity with integrity. (See Corrie Ten Boom's “The Hiding Place”).
Misha and Janusz Korczak had such a happy relationship because they recognized in each other the ability to rise above strife and look at the silver lining in the dark thunderclouds of history that hung over their heads.
After the war, Misha ended up in America. He is still the same, naive Misha. War and it's aftermath could not tarnish his innocence completely. In order to deal with his experiences, he starts talking. And talking. “Then one day in Philadelphia...two women stopped and listened...After a while one of them reached out her hand and cupped my ear clump. She smiled and nodded and said, “We hear you. It's enough. It's over.” And they walked on, and I went another way, and I never took to another street corner” (203-204). This action really touched me. I thought it was wonderful that the women were able to sense Misha's need. They didn't scorn him. People need to be heard. Usually, our listening and hearing is enough for them to put their hearts at rest. What a great lesson to remember.
Although Misha had a difficult life – scrounging around for food, being locked in a Jewish Ghetto with the family that he adopted – he always saw joy in his surroundings. He was persistent in reaching goals that he set for himself. He was devoted and unswerving in his love for those he served. Misha is like Milkweed. He travels freely and is able to sprout and bloom where he is planted.
Some thoughts on the interview
I want to preface this post by saying that I love Spinelli and think he can pretty much do no wrong, because he hasn't yet. I also want to preface this by saying that Kami doesn't like Spinelli and probably didn't much like Milkweed. That's okay. We picked this book because Kayli told us to and I am glad we did. It was good for you to read it, Kami.
The most important thing in that interview, I think, is when Spinelli said he wrote the story because you should write about what you care about. Thinking about Spinelli and all of his books, not just Milkweed, I would have to conclude that Spinelli cares most deeply about the humanity of children. Their innocence, the way they think, the way they can influence others despite their limited power, the way they can be cruel, and the way they can be different in an unaffected way because they don't yet understand what is "normal." I don't think many writers can capture that like Spinelli has and continues to do. I think that is why I find his writing so powerful despite its surface simplicity.
The other thing I found powerful was when Spinelli said, "Six million holocausts of one." I, unlike Spinelli, can't handle studying the holocaust. I can't look at the pictures, I can't handle watching the video footage, and I try to avoid books that deal with the subject as a general rule. I find it emotionally more than I can take. However, every once in awhile an author or director will handle it in a way that makes it about a holocaust of one--like Milkweed and Life is Beautiful, and I think that is powerful. It scares me when I hear about Oxford professors getting fired for teaching that the government made up the holocaust. We have to teach it, we have to think about it periodically, and we have to remember that it can and has happened again, and that even if we sacrifice our soldiers, we have to stop it.
I found it annoying when the interviewer talked about this book being too "horrifying" for young readers. What?? I thought Spinelli had the perfect light touch, and he was absolutely right that he mixed so many rays of light in with the awfulness that it becomes bearable and readable, and certainly acceptable for young readers. For example, just Misha's belief that the Jackboots were fantastic and cool is deeply horrible, but so understandable. And Uri's impatience with him is so sad, but understandable. And Uri's having to hurt him to save him was heartbreaking, yet Uri was such a noble character. Janina's being so ridiculously ANNOYING was also so believable and how much Misha clung to her was so sad and so true to how much every child wants/needs a family and a sense of belonging.
Again, I found lots of rays of hope and light in the book. That his daughter found him and had compassion and allowed him to live out the rest of his life in dignity was the perfect ending. I certainly don't blame his wife for leaving him--again, it rang true. It would be hard to live with a damaged person like he was. Sometimes I was annoyed that never seemed to "get it." That he told people about his story, but without getting the sense that he really understood his story. I was frustrated with him throughout so much of the book, but then I thought of Miriam left alone in such an inexplicable situation as a holocaust ghetto, struggling to figure out who was friend and foe and mostly WHY, and it really rings true. She would never "get it" on her own. I could explain it to her for years, and she wouldn't necessarily "get it" until she was older. Misha didn't have the opportunity to study, to discuss with other what had happened, he never could really organize the events in his head, and it all happened when he was too young for any real understanding--so in the end, when he still seemed slightly crazy, it still rang true to me. Now we would say he needed serious counseling.
Anyway, I've gone on much longer than I intended. I'm curious to hear what you all had to say.
The most important thing in that interview, I think, is when Spinelli said he wrote the story because you should write about what you care about. Thinking about Spinelli and all of his books, not just Milkweed, I would have to conclude that Spinelli cares most deeply about the humanity of children. Their innocence, the way they think, the way they can influence others despite their limited power, the way they can be cruel, and the way they can be different in an unaffected way because they don't yet understand what is "normal." I don't think many writers can capture that like Spinelli has and continues to do. I think that is why I find his writing so powerful despite its surface simplicity.
The other thing I found powerful was when Spinelli said, "Six million holocausts of one." I, unlike Spinelli, can't handle studying the holocaust. I can't look at the pictures, I can't handle watching the video footage, and I try to avoid books that deal with the subject as a general rule. I find it emotionally more than I can take. However, every once in awhile an author or director will handle it in a way that makes it about a holocaust of one--like Milkweed and Life is Beautiful, and I think that is powerful. It scares me when I hear about Oxford professors getting fired for teaching that the government made up the holocaust. We have to teach it, we have to think about it periodically, and we have to remember that it can and has happened again, and that even if we sacrifice our soldiers, we have to stop it.
I found it annoying when the interviewer talked about this book being too "horrifying" for young readers. What?? I thought Spinelli had the perfect light touch, and he was absolutely right that he mixed so many rays of light in with the awfulness that it becomes bearable and readable, and certainly acceptable for young readers. For example, just Misha's belief that the Jackboots were fantastic and cool is deeply horrible, but so understandable. And Uri's impatience with him is so sad, but understandable. And Uri's having to hurt him to save him was heartbreaking, yet Uri was such a noble character. Janina's being so ridiculously ANNOYING was also so believable and how much Misha clung to her was so sad and so true to how much every child wants/needs a family and a sense of belonging.
Again, I found lots of rays of hope and light in the book. That his daughter found him and had compassion and allowed him to live out the rest of his life in dignity was the perfect ending. I certainly don't blame his wife for leaving him--again, it rang true. It would be hard to live with a damaged person like he was. Sometimes I was annoyed that never seemed to "get it." That he told people about his story, but without getting the sense that he really understood his story. I was frustrated with him throughout so much of the book, but then I thought of Miriam left alone in such an inexplicable situation as a holocaust ghetto, struggling to figure out who was friend and foe and mostly WHY, and it really rings true. She would never "get it" on her own. I could explain it to her for years, and she wouldn't necessarily "get it" until she was older. Misha didn't have the opportunity to study, to discuss with other what had happened, he never could really organize the events in his head, and it all happened when he was too young for any real understanding--so in the end, when he still seemed slightly crazy, it still rang true to me. Now we would say he needed serious counseling.
Anyway, I've gone on much longer than I intended. I'm curious to hear what you all had to say.
Milkweed an Interview with Spinelli
I'm including this interview because despite some lame questions by the interviewer, Spinelli managed to say some pretty great things.
About Milkweed
The Cold War
Okay, Kami called me and threatened to boycott the reading blog (gasp) if I didn't write about the Cold War book I had thrust upon her. Ahem. Unfortunately, there is some bad news in that area. My MIL came over the other morning unexpectedly to clean my house (my morning sickness has been REALLY bad and she felt sorry for me--nice lady), and so she was here while I was at the swimming pool for my kids' swimming lessons. And, long story short, she threw away my notes about the book. At least, that is what I am assuming because I went to get them today and they were gone. And the shelf was neatened and straightened. Sigh. I had lots of things written down, but all on scraps of paper that probably looked quite a bit like garbage. Can't really blame her.
So--all I can remember that I wanted to write about was that I really liked the author. Kami found him a bit dry, but considering he's a historian, I thought he was fairly entertaining. Also, I really appreciated that he gave such well-rounded coverage of each president.
For example, in the history textbooks I have seen, Eisenhower was always portrayed as a non-president. Meaning, he did a lot of golfing and that was about it. I always wondered how a man could go from being one of the best military brains in the world to being a useless dud, but Brands cleared up that misapprehension right away. In fact, after thinking about what could have happened, I was very grateful that Eisenhower was the president when he was.
Same with Nixon. I had heard all the bad things, but hadn't realized that he was the president that really made serious progress in easing up tensions between the US and China and the US and Russia. I had always heard that Reagan was the big man when it came to ending the Cold War, but lo and behold, if any credit should go to an American (which is a little dubious), than Nixon should get it. Reagan got lucky. Gorbachev actually forced Reagan into ending the Cold War, despite Reagan's trying everything possible to keep it going so that his economy (based on the Star Wars program) wouldn't falter. Again, this I did not know.
Also, Kami and Kelly both talked about how many times presidents and their administrations falsified things and misled the public, and did all sorts of other nefarious things in order to shore up the economy, or help win an election. I have no illusions about whether or not that will ever end. However, Kami and I talked at length about the moral superiority that the US gave up in order to have fun with their little covert operations. At first, I was undecided. America does need to protect its interests from unscrupulous peoples and governments, and often being unscrupulous is the first line of attack against the unscrupulous. I certainly did not want to say always take the high road even at the expense of America's security.
But now, I have stopped wavering. The more I think about the founding fathers and the vision of this country, the more I believe that America does not have to be unscrupulous and immoral in order to preserve our liberties. Torture is wrong. Planning to assassinate someone is wrong. Forcing our military personnel to do things that are morally questionable is wrong.
While I disagree strongly with most of my current students who spend many words on whining about how terrible the USA is, and how they think Bush is completely to blame, and how we are all doomed to starvation and it is because of the Iraq War and other such nonsense, I have a firm belief, still, in the incredible nature of this country and I don't want it tainted by morally questionable behavior on our part.
We might sometimes err in not becoming involved somewhere else in the world soon enough, or we might err by becoming involved too soon, or we might err in arresting someone who is actually innocent, and we might make thousands of mistakes. But, that is okay. What is not okay is when we willingly and knowingly do things that are blatantly wrong. To err is human, to do it on purpose is stupid.
I had other thoughts and some really great quotes, but I won't be posting them here. Obviously.
Also, I finished Milkweed on Monday and I keep waiting for someone to open the discussion about it. Since that isn't happening, I will open the discussion about it in another post. Just know that until my morning sickness subsides and my book is written and my classes final projects are graded--I won't be writing nice essays like Kammers and Kelly. But, I still want to and intend to eventually.
And just to make it official, on Monday, we are officially starting to talk about the Life of Bees, so if you want to discuss Milkweed, you have the rest of this week.
So--all I can remember that I wanted to write about was that I really liked the author. Kami found him a bit dry, but considering he's a historian, I thought he was fairly entertaining. Also, I really appreciated that he gave such well-rounded coverage of each president.
For example, in the history textbooks I have seen, Eisenhower was always portrayed as a non-president. Meaning, he did a lot of golfing and that was about it. I always wondered how a man could go from being one of the best military brains in the world to being a useless dud, but Brands cleared up that misapprehension right away. In fact, after thinking about what could have happened, I was very grateful that Eisenhower was the president when he was.
Same with Nixon. I had heard all the bad things, but hadn't realized that he was the president that really made serious progress in easing up tensions between the US and China and the US and Russia. I had always heard that Reagan was the big man when it came to ending the Cold War, but lo and behold, if any credit should go to an American (which is a little dubious), than Nixon should get it. Reagan got lucky. Gorbachev actually forced Reagan into ending the Cold War, despite Reagan's trying everything possible to keep it going so that his economy (based on the Star Wars program) wouldn't falter. Again, this I did not know.
Also, Kami and Kelly both talked about how many times presidents and their administrations falsified things and misled the public, and did all sorts of other nefarious things in order to shore up the economy, or help win an election. I have no illusions about whether or not that will ever end. However, Kami and I talked at length about the moral superiority that the US gave up in order to have fun with their little covert operations. At first, I was undecided. America does need to protect its interests from unscrupulous peoples and governments, and often being unscrupulous is the first line of attack against the unscrupulous. I certainly did not want to say always take the high road even at the expense of America's security.
But now, I have stopped wavering. The more I think about the founding fathers and the vision of this country, the more I believe that America does not have to be unscrupulous and immoral in order to preserve our liberties. Torture is wrong. Planning to assassinate someone is wrong. Forcing our military personnel to do things that are morally questionable is wrong.
While I disagree strongly with most of my current students who spend many words on whining about how terrible the USA is, and how they think Bush is completely to blame, and how we are all doomed to starvation and it is because of the Iraq War and other such nonsense, I have a firm belief, still, in the incredible nature of this country and I don't want it tainted by morally questionable behavior on our part.
We might sometimes err in not becoming involved somewhere else in the world soon enough, or we might err by becoming involved too soon, or we might err in arresting someone who is actually innocent, and we might make thousands of mistakes. But, that is okay. What is not okay is when we willingly and knowingly do things that are blatantly wrong. To err is human, to do it on purpose is stupid.
I had other thoughts and some really great quotes, but I won't be posting them here. Obviously.
Also, I finished Milkweed on Monday and I keep waiting for someone to open the discussion about it. Since that isn't happening, I will open the discussion about it in another post. Just know that until my morning sickness subsides and my book is written and my classes final projects are graded--I won't be writing nice essays like Kammers and Kelly. But, I still want to and intend to eventually.
And just to make it official, on Monday, we are officially starting to talk about the Life of Bees, so if you want to discuss Milkweed, you have the rest of this week.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
