Townie Discussion Notes

Temperatures in the high 90's. Despite  the heat, the discussion was surprisingly unheated.  Or because of the heat, everyone wanted to stay cool?  

To a person, Dubus the father was the better writer. And the short story extremely moving. (The son's best writing in the memoir, many felt, was the train scene. No one has read his fiction.) The memoir at times repetitive, sometimes stretching credulity--how could Dubus, the son, not have known about The Red Sox? Was the neighborhood as bad as  he said it was?   

Was Dubus, senior, simply the better writer? Or was it because fiction lends itself to better writing--you are not locked in by the truth...while memoir strives for honesty?  This statement thrown out in the hopes of arousing a discussion, led to one member saying that good writing is good writing and has nothing to do with the genre.  And the thought was blown out the window by the ceiling fan that did little to cool off the room.

Other thoughts:  the contrast between Senior Dubus in reality and his version of a father in his short story illustrates either that Dubus the son, was wrong about his father or that his father understood what it takes to be a father but couldn't achieve that in real life.  Dubus was actually a good father for his time:  he saw his children weekly and paid child support.  Why didn't he know about their almost tragic difficulties?  Was everyone trying to keep it from him so that he would stick around?  not take them away from their mother?  

Dubus III struggles with but never confronts or questions his father about his neglect.  Which brought up a mention of This American Life Father's Day program on just that...confronting your parent with their past mistakes.   The conclusion:  When you are an adult, your parents are not the same people they were when they hurt you...you can't  question that parent any longer. 

June 20, 2012 Next Book: Townie by Andre Dubus III and a short story by his father...see link below

and  "A Father's Story" by Andre Dubus
Here is link:

A Father's Story pdf

Giving Up The Ghost: Discussion Notes

Arrived late...very late. So this entry will be short...very short despite the fact that  members tried to catch me up on the discussion of this well-liked memoir.  There was a good discussion about  Mantel's vision of evil as a 7 year old.  Was she actually abused in some way that was too terrible for her to write about? Perhaps  she just witnessed abuse? a shocking act?  Or, did she hallucinate--a first migraine aura?  a vision brought on by her religious education? her new awareness of sin?  Most members agreed with the second group of  explanations. This blogger during the  initial reading felt that the author  had either experienced or witnessed an actual trauma.  But on second reading felt that it might have been a vision since Mantel experiences other encounters with ghosts...of the former living and the never living--her unborn, never even physically conceived children.  (I did a little research last night, and found two reviews...that seemed to line up on both sides of the argument.  But no definitive word from Mantel.)

Book talk was enriched by hearing passages read aloud...such as the piece on parents and why they shouldn't be judged by their children.  And a discussion of how the memoir felt honest due to1.  Mantel's structure...not linear but circular --reflecting the way that memories are actually remembered. 2. Mantel's use of  dialogue, sensory descriptions and  imagery that could  have been remembered by a child (Not impossibly complicated scenes that only an adult with a recorder could capture .) 3. By using a voice that mirrored the age of Mantel at each point in the memoir.

Members were interested in how and why Mantel included and excluded aspects of her life.  Where were her brothers? her husband?  (In my research last night, a reviewer said that she wrote about herself as a child and then her childless self--sounds logical.)  We concluded that Mantel wanted to tell the part of her life that she wanted to tell...and not let others including curious readers keep her from that mission.  After 60 years, she wanted no part of other people defining her life for her.

Highly recommended by all.

Many members seemed to think Hilary Mantel’s experience with the devil was psychological, brought on by something she had either repressed or suppressed, most likely sexual abuse—even though she raises and dismisses such a cause. I'm not so sure. HM describes seeing something evil and feeling it enter her, take possession and remain, a spiritual torment. Given how she views what occurred, it seems to me that any redress would also have to be spiritual, an exorcism perhaps. 


by B.B. 

What's Next? Giving Up the Ghost by Hilary Mantel

May 23, 2012

Austerlitz meeting notes...

sol·ip·sism  (slp-szm, slp-)

n. Philosophy

1. The theory that the self is the only thing that can be known and verified.

2. The theory or view that the self is the only reality.

The discussion last night bounced back and forth and back again a bit disjointedly but nonetheless helped do what book group does best...give readers insights that can not be gained through solitary reading and reflection. Some threads of discussion:


A memoir-like novel that is a many layered text.  A work that leads readers to question reality.  Memory.  Time.  And philosophy.

Book talk began with a discussion about the author's decision to include  discarded, flea market postcards and unidentified photos.  The sponsor stated that she valued and recommended the book because of the philosophical questions it raises: What is the reality of a photo, image, or experience? Is reality whatever an   individual interprets it to be, as solipsism suggests. Is only what the self knows or believes real?

Most agreed that Sebald was able to brilliantly  develop his out of focus, disconnected, deeply depressed character, Austerlitz, using scavenged, soft- focus photos and the device of a dispassionate narrator relaying Austerlitz's painful journey.  Sebald's version of the found photos is  authentic...a reality that he created that rings true.  (The sponsor also wondered how the invention of photography and photos themselves affect the way we remember and construct our past reality.  Members briefly mused about how long photos remain recognizable...three generations?...before they are meaningless.)

 A work that tells a  truth about the Holocaust.  All done by Sebald without resorting to traditional plot lines and character exposition.

Conversation was diverted abruptly away from the philosophical towards the emotional impact of the story.  (Mea culpa...but it eventually came back to philosophy.)  One member said that this book, different from many of the novels we have read in the past, did not rely on enfolding of characters through straight-forward narrative and plot. My words follow, so I guess my reality, but it states the premise I think I heard: The Holocaust in Austerlitz is no operatic drama of death, but, instead, a slow, steady erosion of life. A quick sand that sucks you in despite or because of your struggle to free yourself. A Holocaust dependent upon things as mundane as a 1000 French movers earning their salary by clearing out 40,000 victims' apartments. A Holocaust that is so meticulous and thorough,   rosin  from violin cases is painstakingly collected and stacked in a warehouse.  A  Holocaust that masquerades a death camp as a place of culture.  And a Holocaust that mangled Austerlitz's spirit or soul at the age of 4 and a half.  (The  Kinder Transport saved Austerlitz's life, but left him unable to get close to other human beings.  And for most of his life, to face the mystery of his origin. Documentaries of Kinder Transport suggest that the feeling of abandonment never goes away.)

Sebald tells the truth about memory, the passage of time.


Austerlitz's suppressed memories  are always lurking ready to appear through faces, an object in a flea market, through a glimpse at photo, by walking in a room. Austerlitz longs to  find what he lost in the past in the corners of the world that seem never to change.  Several members mentioned their  early sensory memories of their world are their most vivid memories.  

A work with sentences that run on for pages and meander on but that contain gems of thought and create a mood that matches the content.

Paraphrased comments:  "Difficult to read.   I had to reread each time I picked up the book before I could move on."  Contrasting point of view: " I could read in snatches or long sections and still feel connected and satisfied." Members who stuck with it, were glad that they did.  

BUT...

One reader just came to find out why she should have read or should have appreciated reading the book, when she didn't.  Forgot to ask her if she found out.  G?  Care to comment?  Another member stopped reading altogether and didn't come to meeting. The foreword we read from, left her even less interested in reading.  After hearing my version of the discussion, she said she might pick the book/Kindle up again.

click comments below for another point of view and other comments

Next Book: Austerlitz April 25, 2012

In a No Man's Land of Memories and Loss

By MICHIKO KAKUTANI

With W. G. Sebald's haunting new book, ''Austerlitz,'' we are transported to a memoryscape -- a twilight, fogbound world of half-remembered images and ghosts that is reminiscent at once of Ingmar Bergman's ''Wild Strawberries,'' Kafka's troubling fables of guilt and apprehension and, of course, Proust's ''Remembrance of Things Past.'' As in Proust's great masterwork, ordinary objects and places reverberate with memories, but in ''Austerlitz'' those memories -- triggered by a train station, say, a deserted house, an old photograph or a domed ceiling -- tend to remain fragmentary, elusive and vaguely sinister.

October 26, 2001ARTSREVIEW
From the New York Times 

Big City Book Group Link Below

New York Times Book Group