Boy, I feel like Ben picked a book that is maybe 10 IQ points higher than my reading level! I'm 80 pages in and I'm only able to follow the main story, but I feel there is a lot of subtlety going over my head. It's an interesting read thus far.
My question is pretty abstract. Do you think the more well adjusted a person is, the more politically moderate they are? Maybe that is an obvious yes. Maybe not. I am just trying to line up Daniel's odd behavior (at times it seems disturbing) with his political outlook. Offensive or not, political radicalism in our day seems juvenile and immature. If you are really on the far left, you are irresponsible. If you are on the far right, you are a bigot. It seems to me as you grow up and experience things, you find the middle ground - where reasonable resides. It seems to me that the extremeness of both Daniel's parents and their political polar opposites are the cause of major conflict in this story and in current events. What do you think?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Well said, Frank. I know you're a big fan of Colin Cowherd. One of my favorite things that he always says is that smart, successful people become more CONSERVATIVE the older they get. As a caveat, this does NOT mean one becomes less democrat and more republican, party preference is completely different. But as someone experiences the world more and matures, idealistic liberal views are recognized as unreasonable or immature. I completely agree with that argument.
I too feel very lost at times in this novel. I think a background in Russian and Jewish history has helped a little, but not much. Just when I thought I had somewhat of a grasp on Daniel and his character, he decides to "abuse" his wife while driving in the car. The sexual nature of the book is obviously a huge part of what Doctorow is trying to say, but I'm not sure I am grasping it. Any ideas?
Nick,
You point out that just as you thought you had Daniel figured out he decides to abuse his wife. I'm not very deep into the book but I think trust and betrayal are and will be major themes. Maybe things will make more sense when you're looking for people and things to turn on you. Perhaps Doctorow betrays his readers a bit. I apologize if the book is too dense or cryptic for our purposes. For me, it's not so much about the reading quality as it is our interactions. The book was recommended to me by my sister, Becky, who just got a teaching position at Harvard (Congrats Beck!). I figured it would be good.
I think "well adjusted" is a pretty loaded term. What does that mean to you? For my purposes, I'll imagine you mean someone living a stable existence (job, enough money, loving family, etc). I don't think this makes people more politically moderate, it makes them more politically apathetic. Most people don't just wake up and say hey "I wanna be a crack pot extremist!." Something has driven them there. Some "crazy liberal" who thinks heath care should be given away for free, probably had a family member die because they couldn't afford proper care. The same can be said for someone on the far left. And as much as the middle ground is safe, its also dangerous. This country wasn't founded on middle ground thinking and it won't be saved by it either.
Frank,
To respond to your post. I think it's interesting - the idea that experience could create moderates. I tend to think that experience creates political cynics as people hear the same rhetoric from 'new' candidates who consistently fail to deliver on their promises to be the 'cure' for the previous 'failure.' Party A reigns for a while, screws the pooch, and the next one wins by promising change for the better. That doesn't happen either so we let party A have another go at it. After a few times around the block, Andy and Andrea Activist are a bit numb so they linger in the middle, not willing to throw themselves into the new movement and not willing to join the otherside. Perhaps disenfranchised idealists become cynical moderates. How's that for a cheerful post!
Post a Comment