Atonement by Ian McEwan

What can I say, the novel made me just as mad as the movie did!  In all fairness, I saw the movie first.  I don’t usually read the book after I watch the movie, but I found that the movie made me want to know more about how the story was written.  I wanted to know the order in which it was told, POV, clues, etc.  I truly think that the movie did a great job “telling” this story and I feel satisfied after having read the novel too.

I will start by saying that this story is beautifully written, with so much detail and emotion.  It is really a story based on one misunderstood moment between two people.  I feel like it really speaks to our modern times where we tend to misinterpret peoples actions and we assume we know what people are doing.  As a society, we judge others by their mannerisms, use of words, their social standing, their age, their wealth, their education, race, gender and general lot in life.  It is a great look into society and its unyielding portrayal of hierarchy and its power.  And, it’s infuriating!

This book evokes anger for its unfairness, for the lies it supports, for the lives it ruins and for its lack of atonement.  Yes, I said lack of atonement.  The meaning of atonement is to make amends or make right what was wrong.  There is never an atonement made in this novel.  There are slight attempts and meaning well but never is the wrong made right.  Even Briony states that she doesn’t consider herself a liar despite knowing she didn’t tell the truth.

Briony’s “crime” as identified by the narrator is that she is a liar.  She is spinner of tales and a teller of tales.  All of these are nice ways of saying that she makes things up…or lies.  She does nothing but lie about who she saw attack Lola.  She could have said it was too dark to be sure who it was and just give a description.  She could have helped Lola remember what the perpetrator looked like.  She could have said it was too dark to be sure.  Any of these explanations would have been acceptable.  The explanation that is not acceptable is that she repeatedly says she “saw him”.

I felt like it could have all been different if Robbie had never written the sexually driven note or if he had put the sweeter one in the envelope.  But I guess it had already been fated that his life would not be easy from this moment.  If he had just delivered the note directly to Cecilia or if Briony had never opened the note.  There were so many moments that could have altered the ending for Cecilia and Robbie.  Cecilia and Robbie were never given the opportunity to live a true life together so Briony should not have been absolved a lifetime of guilt.  Briony describes herself as a conceited child when she reflects on that fateful night in the final chapter of the novel.  She is right.  That is why she never apologizes, she merely writes an alternate ending to her book where Cecilia and Robbie are together.

Did you like this novel? Was the order in which it was written affect your feelings about the story?

What was the moment you felt was pivotal to creating the series of events that lead to Robbie’s demise?

What was your opinion of Briony?  Do you feel that Briony atoned for her lies?

Could Cecilia and Robbie have made a life together if Robbie hadn’t gone to prison and war?  What do you think of the ending?

If you’ve seen the movie, what questions did the book answer for you?  Did you prefer the movie or the book?

And the Mountains Echoed by Khaled Hosseini

As the teardrops that I cried for the last forty pages of this book dry themselves, I sit here thinking about how this beautiful book unfolded before me.  Again, I am impressed by the author’s ability to create such a rich story that transcends time and then he brings it all back together in an effortless fashion.

This novel begins and ends with the story of a brother and a sister whose love for one another is palpable throughout the book.  Because of these two characters we are introduced to other amazing characters through the time they are apart.  There is so much hope, love and understanding within them all and I think that the symbolism of these characters is that relationships, gender, social status and birth do not define us, but we are defined by the love rooted with in us and the bonds we feel with other humans.  Several of the “love” relationships that the author creates are not necessarily bound by blood.  They transcend blood and are bound by empathy and good nature. 

The relationship between Abdullah and Pari is familial but is broken by their own family for good intentions and in desperate measures.  Uncle Nabi and their father think they are doing what is best for their family: “The finger cut, to save the hand (page 48).”  This proverb seems harsh but can be seen as the necessary evil to survival. 

The relationship between Nabi’s twin sisters is echoed throughout the book, most notably Nabi and Mr. Wahdati’s relationship, Thalia’s relationship with Markos’ mama, and in younger Pari’s relationship with her father.  It was as though the author was trying to convey that blood isn’t always thicker than water.  That love can exist between two people based on shared emotions and experiences.  Sometimes our blood relatives are not our most trusted or caring people in our lives.

I feel that the storyline of paralleling the Afghan wars and the tragedies in the characters’ lives was so emotional and mirrored the eras and changes happening within the country and within these families.  War affects us all in small ways and in big ways.  Sometimes they are obvious and sometimes unnoticed.  The war within these families is emotional, the struggle is financial and it all takes its toll on the characters. 

This book follows in the footsteps of its two predecessors.  Hosseini does a gorgeous job of depicting the scenery and of depicting the weight of love we feel for the people in our lives.  His ability to peel back all of the layers of these characters and describe the human experience is a beautiful ability to describe us all as caring beings.  We have our faults but underneath we are all doing our best to be good people.  Maybe we are all caregivers in our own way.

My favorite quote from this book:  “They tell me I must wade into waters, where I will soon drown.  Before I march in, I leave this on the shore for you.  I pray you find it, sister, so you will know what was in my heart as I went under.”

What did you think of the story Baba tells in the beginning of the book?  Is it the foreshadowing of what is to come?

Was the sale of Pari to the Wahdati’s beneficial?  Who did it benefit most?  Who did it hurt most?  Was it a financial or emotional gain?

What do you feel was the significance of the caregiver relationships throughout the novel?

How did the deaths of Masooma by Parwana and the death of Mr. Wahdati by Nabi affect you?  Did you feel they were necessary?  Was it fair of Masooma and Wahdati to ask their caregivers to do what they did?  Was it a gracious act of love?

What did you think when Nila told Nabi: “It was you, Nabi.  It was always you. Didn’t you know (page 113)”?  Were you surprised by the box of drawings?  How did you feel about Nabi’s reaction to finding the box?

In Nabi’s letter to Markos, he says: “Please tell her [Pari], tell her that I cannot know the myriad consequences of what I set into motion.  Tell her I took solace only in hope (page 131).”  Is this his apology or his justification?  How would he feel if he was able to meet her at the end?

Abdullah always made excuses as to why the younger Pari couldn’t do things with her friends, go to parties or go off to college, why do you think he restricted her?  Was it religious or selfish?

At the end, Abdullah leaves a package for Pari to open, which the younger Pari delivers to her, what did you think he had left her? 

Pari says: “I don’t know what this feather means, the story of it, but I know it means he was thinking of me.  For all these years.  He remembered me (page 401).”  Do you remember the meaning of the feathers?

What is the meaning of the title “And the Mountains Echoed”? 

I really enjoyed this book and it turned out to be an unexpected story…not what the title insinuates.  This book tells the story of the power of family, culture, secrets and forgiveness.  It was a great example of perseverance and stoicism.  After reading several other stories about Japanese culture, I felt that it held true to the traditions of the Japanese culture and to their pride and resolution to go beyond what their history depicts.

Shoko’s life from the beginning seems to be a story of survival and strong will.  When she and her brother Taro are kidnapped by the nanny, it looks like their little lives would be cut short, but Shoko prevails and becomes the heroine of her own life, as well as Taro’s.  Shoko seems to never truly have control of her life as a woman in shadow of post-WWII Japan, but she kind of does.  She may not have the education she craves but she still takes the opportunities she has to leave her small town and work to make her own money (and help support the family).  As a woman, her society expects her to accommodate her life for men.  First she must change her life when her father changes their societal status and becomes a priest.  Then she is the sole provider of money so that her brother Taro can get an education.  She is then the forced (by Taro and her father) to flee Japan with a baby and with an American husband.  Her husband then forces her to keep Mike’s conception a secret.  Shoko embraces America and leaves Japanese culture and language behind to accommodate her husband and children.  Shoko does not return to Japan because Taro cannot forgive her “choices”.  Shoko also doesn’t return to Japan because of her American husband, Charlie.  Shoko’s son Mike is a disappointment…she raised him in the Japanese way but in America so he is a clash of two cultures.  Although, Shoko is bound by the constraints of her Japanese culture, she still prevails after time heals their family secrets.  She is the strength of her family.

Mike is Shoko’s oldest child and biggest secret.  I felt that Shoko tended to treat him with more care than she did with Sue because of his gender and possibly to make up for his real father’s death.  Shoko gave Mike free reign of his life when he actually needed more control.  She needed to be more controlling with him versus giving him freedom like she thought Japanese boys needed.  Mike is an anomaly because he is 100% Japanese but his mentality is completely American. It seems like the whole family has given up on Mike and has no hopes for his future.

I feel that Charlie knew that Shoko was pregnant with another man’s child from the beginning but that his love and admiration for her was always genuine; therefore, he didn’t care about Shoko’s past.  I do believe that he never wanted to control her but that society created the man versus woman dichotomy.  I do think that in their actual household, Shoko ruled the roost.  Charlie liked Shoko’s control over the household and accepted anything that she wanted.  He embraced her culture and wanted to keep her life from Japan alive for her in America.  I think he was truly in love with her from the beginning.

Taro is a complex character because he owed so much to Shoko (his life, education, family) and yet could not forgive her for marrying an American soldier (even though it was his father’s wish).  I almost feel that he used Shoko as the scapegoat for the ruining of Japan.  She was the example of the old Japan relinquishing itself to American culture literally and symbolically.  Shoko saves Taro’s life when he is an infant but pride prevents him from forgiving her.  His forgiveness doesn’t come easy but it seems like he was ready to salvage their relationship and he seemed like he missed her.  I think that he never wanted to banish her but that his stubbornness prevented him from embracing anything foreign.

The only man that gives Shoko a choice and a chance at true freedom is Ronin.  It is ironic that he is what ends up binding her to a life of secrecy.  Because of his lack of a societal foothold, Ronin had no prejudices for gender or rankings.  He saw America as his opportunity to shed his label and to make opportunity happen for him, and sequentially Shoko.  His true love for her was so sweet and innocent.

Sue and Helena are Shoko’s hope for the future.  Isn’t it ironic that they are women and not the typical expectation of hope in Japanese culture or even American culture?  These two ladies are only ½ and ¼ Japanese but embody more of the Japanese culture and fully embrace its history.  It seems like Sue has always wanted to be Japanese but that she was hindered by her mother and by society.  I loved that she embraces her family’s past and that she travels to Japan and helps her mother unravel all of the family secrets.  She is brave, like Shoko, and is passing her bravery on to her daughter.  Sue may have been the “sleeper” of the entire book.

This story reminded me of stories from my family’s history where poverty and circumstance really determined your “Lot in life”.  So many dreams of education and success are doused by the reality of your place in the world.  While some have all and continue to do so, others have little and do what they can to better themselves…sometimes by a lot and sometimes by very little.  The expectations of our lives are mostly due to free will but are also determined by our opportunities.  It’s what we do with those opportunities that makes a difference.  It’s also a perspective on our acceptance of what is and finding satisfaction with the lives we live.

 

Is Taro ungrateful?  Is Taro selfish?  Or is he just playing to the expectation of Japanese culture?

Is culture and pride enough to hold a grudge?  Is this the only reason Taro cannot forgive Shoko’s pregnancy and American marriage?

Is Shoko the heroine?  Is Sue the heroine?  Why?

Why is there more complexity to Sue’s character than Mike’s?

Why is Mike so underwhelmed by the news of his biological father?  Is his reaction in accordance with the news or with his personality?

Do the men in this book control Shoko to be cruel or because of how our cultures treat women and men?

What are similarities of the American and Japanese cultures?  Differences?

What are your thoughts on the anecdotes at the begging of each chapter?  Where you amused by the titles to the “fake” book chapters?

Do you feel constraints by your culture? Gender? Family?  What family issues do you relate to in this book?

Is this book about gender (man vs woman), culture (Japanese vs American) or family (Shoko vs Taro)?  What perspective do you feel was strongest?

 

P.S.

How to Be an American Housewife

The quotes form the fictitious book are hilarious.  Which was your favorite?  Mine were:

-“It is not advisable to teach your American-born children Japanese.  It will only confuse their language development…They are Americans and should learn only English, as Americans do. (page 200)”  In today’s political climate, it seems fitting that we are discussing immigration and refugees.  I am American born with Mexican heritage and I do speak fluent Spanish.  I do feel embraced by some and repelled by others.  Why is it that other countries “allow” citizens to speak several different languages and yet our “melting pot” looks negatively at it even in 2016?

-“Child-rearing in America is a good deal more callous and cold than in Japan.  Americans do not believe in letting the baby sleep with them, or carrying them all the time, the way a Japanese mother does.  They take a far more disciplinarian approach to child-raising than we do in Japan. (page 156)”  There are so many contradictory parenting approaches these days and this quote really articulates how Americans truly are different in their parenting skills.  With my first child, I tried to instill the strict baby sleeping schedules and no sleeping in the bed and not carrying him all of the time.  But with the birth of my second son, I really changed my tune.  Now they both are allowed in our bed and I hold them as much as possible.  I realized that the strictness was hard on all of us and now we have a more peaceful co-existence.

-“Getting used to American negativity can be difficult.  Americans do not politely defer or help you save face; they simply say, ‘No,’ loudly and emphatically.  Being aware of this phenomenon will help prevent shock. (page 38)”  This quote is hilarious because it is so true.  Why are we so rude?!  It is hard to see ourselves through others eye but I know that’s what other cultures think of us.  When we moved to Germany for our first military assignment, the one thing we were told was “Don’t act like an American!”  It did make living in a foreign country much more pleasant because we got along and understood their culture.

I hope that this book redeemed me from the January book and I hope that it met the criteria for a love themed month. 

This book was so magical with its twists in the story and its weaves through time.  The beginning proved a little difficult to understand the back and forth through time and the plethora of new characters being introduced but once I was able to sit in quiet to process the characters, I really enjoyed the plot and it was easier to understand everyone’s role in the story.  Plus, the theme of unrequited love is always beautiful and suspenseful in a heartbreaking way. 

We see the idea of unrequited love between Leo and Alma, Bruno and Alma, Alma and Misha, Bird and God, and Alma’s mother and Jacob Marcus.  There are a lot of misunderstandings and things left unsaid by the characters.  There are many moments where just one small change would have changed the story for the characters.  I think that the unrequited love theme also leads to a sub-theme of jealousy.  Jealousy, not in its mean spirited variety, but a more envious feeling and from the idea of being helpless in its manifestation of despair.  It’s the ever present idea of wanting someone to like you as much as you like them, but learning that they don’t or that they stopped.

I was most enthralled with the main story of Leo and Alma.  It was such a sweet story of young love hindered by war and distance.  This book really highlights a story of “what could have been” in a very poetic and solemn way.  Leo never gets his chance to live a life with Alma and his son like he envisioned.  But his heartache turned into a story that inspired other people to fall in love (present-day Alma’s parents).  Leo’s story is his tribute to his beloved and then becomes an account of his son’s true history.  Leo is the catalyst for the novel.  It’s his actions and inactions that keep the plot moving to its sad end. His love never comes to fruition. 

This was truly a love story that spans time and language.  It was a non-saccharine sweet love story that had historic relevance and was a plausible story for many immigrants back before texting and email.  When distance and time separate us, it is easy to see the disintegration of relationships.  Luckily, this book brought it all back full circle to remind us that love, grief, and compassion continue no matter how much time lapses.  

What did you think of Alma’s decision to stay in her marriage and not go with Leo?

Was Leo right in letting his son live his entire life never knowing his biological father?

What is the significance of Leo making a point of being “seen” everyday by someone? 

What did you think the purpose of present-day Alma was to the story?  Why couldn’t we have seen this perspective through her mother who was actually translating the story?

Why did Jacob Marcus seek an alias when getting The History of Love translated?  Did he really run a risk by being himself?

What was the most significant relationship besides Leo and Alma? 

Is the novel within The History of Love Leo’s tribute to Alma or a more generalized tribute to an ideal love?

Is the meaning of Alma’s name?  Is there any significance to why the name was never changed in its many translations?