lilbrattyteen's reading journal

Okay, I'm a bit late but whatever.

Currently reading:
Howard Pyle, The Merry Adventures of Robin Hood
Martin Buber, I and Thou
Carl Jung, Symbols of Transformation

I tend to keep one nonfiction and one fiction going at a time, especially now that I'm on summer. Right now I'm being naughty.

To read soon:
C.S. Lewis, Perelandra
C.S. Lewis, That Hideous Strength
A.G. Sertillanges, The Intellectual Life: Its Spirit, Conditions, Methods
Carl Jung, The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious
Joseph Campbell, The Hero With a Thousand Faces

You may be late to the party, but you have a really interesting pile of books in front of you.

I've been wading through Jung for a couple of years now.

Have you read any James Hillman or Marie Louise von Franz?

Jonathan, never too late. Welcome to Club Read. You have some very interesting book listed in your first post. I'll look forward to your posts.

Thank you!

> 2: zenomax

I got into Jung from doing an independent study with a professor on psychology and religion in the 20th century. We read Otto, James, Freud, Jung, and Maslow as well as some of their modern disciples. (We didn't have time for any of the more experimental psychology stuff, and that would be taught in a psychology department anyway, whereas these people wouldn't.) We came away finding Jung both the most baffling and the most fascinating. I recently downed Jung's Memories, Dreams, Reflections which helped me understand him more than any of the psychology we read!

I have some von Franz and Hillman on my book shelf but haven't gotten to them. There are also Christian responders to Jung such as Ann Ulanov, John Sanford, and Morton Kelsey.

It's been so long since I updated! I was on the plane going to Nepal and now have settled in after a few days.

I was reading C. S. Lewis' Perelandra on my layover in Doha when I got to page 141 and found the previous owner of the book tore out ten pages. So I had to lay that one aside until I could find a suitable copy.

At the airport I bought a copy of Paulo Coelho's By the River Piedra I Sat Down and Wept. I had heard of Coelho before as kind of a bland spiritual writer. Thankfully my previous impression was totally wrong!

The book followed a young woman, Pilar, who has gotten herself into a very complacent place in life, which she has worked hard for but does not move her in any way. Then she receives a letter from her former lover of her adolescent years. She finds he has become a spiritual teacher, espousing the blessings of the divine goddess. Her internal monologues, which comprise a large portion of the book, portray her in conflict about what to do with her life.

Coelho writes with a frankness and lack of selfconsciousness about matters of the heart that in many authors' hands would come off tacky or cheesy. By midway through the book I was finding deep succor in his characters' bits of wisdom. While the book could pass as "Christian fiction," I get the impression that Coelho only uses that idiom to speak of human spirituality and love in a broader way.

His style, which moved this reader, reminds me of Herman Hesse's Narcissus and Goldmund, a favorite from my teen years. The characters and their conflicts represent more abstract, archetypal dilemmas of life orientation and value systems. Coelho has written a parable for modern times.

Curious books you're reading and places you're going. Think I'll pass on Coelho, but still interesting to read your response.

American Gods, Neil Gaiman
Finished 6/15/12

Disclaimer: this is a reread. I read this at 16. Since then I have forgotten all of it and read Gaiman's Sandman novels. Rereading this was not a matter of finding out whether I liked it, but of revisiting an old friend.

This novel follows a taciturn tall man named Shadow who finds himself working for a strange man named Wednesday. He comes to realize that he is aiding in a war between the new gods of America (cars, TV, casinos, computers) and the old gods, brought over by the multitude of immigrants who remember the old ways in the U.S.

Gaiman uses his dark style - fast-paced like a thriller yet playfully hinting the imagery in the readers' mind - to explore the premise that the products of the human imagination are real beings who feed on devotion and belief. These gods in America struggle to survive as the immigrants' children forget the old ways. I found the concept of gods falling on hard times both humorous and original. The ideas we create stay around. As Jung said, old ideas and archetypes linger in the mind long after we 'progress beyond them' and lose consciousness of their existence.

So while this is often shelved under 'fantasy,' Gaiman is really his own genre. There are no elves and dwarves in the forest in this adventure. Instead there is cosmic conflict and liminal explorations of the lines between waking and dreaming, life and death, 'reality' and imagination. Gaiman has created a story on the premise that we have forgotten how to populate the darkness surrounding us with beings that make it less scary. Instead we turn the light of the TV on to soothe our insecurities. If only we could see how much we lose by killing the imagination for someone else's TV script.

A definite recommendation.

Enjoyed your review of American Gods. I could be tempted to give this a shot. I have never read any Gaiman.

baswood - I might start with the Sandman series. I like his graphic novels more than his text novels. Somehow his deep imagination transfers better into that mixed media.

Siddhartha, Hermann Hesse
Finished 6/17/2012

The most important prolegomena to reading this story of a soul searching is that it's not intended to be historical. When the protagonist, Siddhartha, meets Gotama Buddha at the start of the book, I was pretty damn confused. Once I got past that this was a great book.

Siddhartha is a young man on a quest. His expected caste life as a priest offering sacrifices does not satisfy him. He leaves his family to become a wandering ascetic, making his life revolve around the skills of fasting, waiting, and thinking. He wanders through many walks of life, always needing to find his own truth rather than learn from another. Through all these different walks of life, he finds the Self, the Siddhartha behind the holy man, behind the businessman, behind the lover. The extended climax of this non-plot-oriented novel is Siddhartha's realization that he has found what he was searching for.

This book, like the last one I read by Paulo Coelho, has very little plot or action, and is told more like a fable or even a parable. Its specific teaching is an indeterminate or vaguely hatched discovery of the character's own arrogance, the dead end of purely cognitive understanding, and the acceptance of his inability to grasp onto current realities and break outside th larger saga of human life. The overtones even feel more Hindu than Buddhist. But the journey of discovery is more important to this reader than the results. Recommended for people who like this sort of story, but also not as good as the other Hesse I read, Narcissus and Goldmund.

Quotes:

"Siddhartha now also realized why he had struggled in vain with this Self when he was a Brahmin and an ascetic. Too much knowledge has hindered him; too many holy verses, too many sacrificial rites, too much mortificiation of the flesh, too much doing and striving." (77)

"He felt that he had now completely learned the art of listening. He had often heard all this before, all these numerous voices in the river, but today they sounded different. He could no longer distinguish the different voices - the merry voice from the weeping voice, the childish voice from the manly voice. They all belonged to each other: the lament of those who yearn, the laughter of the wise, the cry of indignation and groan of the dying. They were all interwoven and interlocked, entwined in a thousand ways." (105)

Well your review had me reaching for the dictionary to look up prolegomena. Good review.

I've been curious about Hesse and recently picked up a copy of Siddhartha. Interesting to read your review.

Thank you!

Anansi Boys by Neil Gaiman
Finished 6/21/12

After reading American Gods for the second time, I realized I should probably try diversify. This tale didn't disappoint. I read the last 200 pages in one day - while making an effort to take breaks.

Anansi Boys picks up from American Gods by taking one of its side characters, Mr. Nancy, and creating a story about his family. Specifically his son, Fat Charlie, a man who is content with his non-quite-content life. Like Shadow in the other novel, Fat Charlie starts dealing with gods and finds out how far his ability to believe will take him.

Overall, a better-told story than American Gods, though less conceptually innovative.

"Stories are like spiders, with all they long legs, and stories are like spiderwebs, which man gets himself all tangled up in but which look so pretty when you see them under a leaf in the morning dew..." (45)

Catholicism: A Journey to the Heart of the Faith, by Robert Barron
Finished 6/22/12

I was received into the Catholic faith at 20 last year, and I wish I had had a book like Barron's to read before I made the leap. I have heard some of his CDs from Lighthouse Catholic Media, and he is one of the few popular Catholic speakers I like. Unlike many of the others, he does not bring his fundamentalist Protestant baggage into Catholicism. Also unlike many on the apologist circuit, he writes and speaks with a moderate tone.

This book in particular is an exposition of the basics of Catholicism: Jesus, God, Paul, Church, saints, prayer, Mary, life and death. Thankfully, Barron avoids the more controversial issues of abortion, homosexuality, and women priests. Instead he packs in allusions to all kinds of writers and thinkers, saints and cathedrals. He explained Jesus' "turn the other cheek" as a kind of turning the other's conscience into their face with love (I had never been able to make sense of this). I loved his story of staring at the rose window of Notre Dame for twenty minutes, as I recently did that at St. Thomas Church in NYC. While some of the chapters dragged on, such as the one on Peter and Paul, the chapters on saints and prayer more than made up for it. I especially like that he picked an all-female lineup of saints for that chapter.

Overall, a book good for non-Catholics to get a flavor of the tradition written neither in a polemic nor a removed academic style. Also good for Catholics needing a refresher.

I'll be a while before I finish another one. Now diving into The Jatakas: Birth Stories of the Bodhisatta.

Interesting post on Barron.

Thank you! I try to get in a healthy balance of fiction and non-fiction. Right now I'm in an intense Buddhist Studies program so getting in any reading at all must be purposive.

One of the great things about Nepal is the amount of books you would not be able to find in American, or even in some cases on Amazon. Today in the back of a bookstore in Thamel, Kathmandu I found a big shelf of comic book adaptations of great Indian myths, world literature, and biographies of famous people. Because SOMEONE, SOMEWHERE had to do a comic book on Mother Theresa's life.

So this afternoon I read through Mother Theresa and Albert Einstein. I also bought a comic book of Jesus' life, based on the Gospels, and endorsed by an Indian bishop. Possibly the weirdest afternoon reading I've ever done.

The New Testament World: Insights from Cultural Anthropology, Bruce Malina
Finished 6/24/12

Imagine you are given some religious literature from an Aboriginal tribe in Australia. You read them, enjoying the beautiful poetry and transcendent meaning. You rest content that you understand them quite well. This may seem ridiculous, but Bruce Malina points out that this is what many people do with the New Testament. We read it little understanding that first-century Mediterranean culture is quite different from 21st-century American culture. In fact, when reading the NT, we are in effect thrown into a foreign country. Malina familiarizes readers with the values and social ontology of the Jesus' times.

Malina characterizes NT society as a collectivist, nonintrospective, stable society in which the social ontology is permeated with concepts of honor vs. shame and clean vs. unclean. People see themselves not as individuals (a la America) but as a part of a group, usually family. As such introspective accounts of someone's psychology are not important. The NT has very little of this type of description that modern Western culture thrives on.

NT society is kept stable by a system of social checks and balances. In America, there is a common belief that prosperity is possible for everyone. If we just redistribute goods better, everyone can be middle-class or above. Not so in the NT world. There the assumption is that all goods are limited. Any gain is at the expense of others in your similar social group or class. Hence envy is a powerful threat. Attracting the envy of others is dangerous, as they may do anything from gossiping about you to killing you. (The Jewish authorities' envy of Jesus is given as their motivation for crucifying him.) One form of envy is in the evil eye, which your enemy can give you as a curse. Certain amulets and spells could protect against the evil eye.

Malina sheds light on various NT passages and stories. For example, when Jesus uses the phrase, "Truly, I say to you..." he is not just emphasizing how true his saying is. It's more like "I swear on my honor, this is true..." Fear of others' envy and anger at his rising above the social status he was born into also explains both the messianic secret in Mark and Jesus' complaints that a prophet is never accepted in his homeland. Little asides like this make the book come together.

When I took Old Testament as Literature, my professor one day went on this rant about how the Israelites loved their wives. Malina points out that marriages in these times were arranged, and how a wife was basically a stranger in her husband's family's home until she bore a son. Her son was her main advocate in family affairs, not her husband, who advocated his mother. Hopefully Malina's research reaches a more popular audience so we can avoid these anachronisms. Highly recommended.

Rating 5/5

In America, there is a common belief that prosperity is possible for everyone. If we just redistribute goods better, everyone can be middle-class or above. Not so in the NT world. There the assumption is that all goods are limited. Any gain is at the expense of others in your similar social group or class. Hence envy is a powerful threat. Attracting the envy of others is dangerous, as they may do anything from gossiping about you to killing you. (The Jewish authorities' envy of Jesus is given as their motivation for crucifying him.)

I find this very strange, because at odds with what I've observed about American society. "Redistribution of goods" such that would make everyone better off (even a little, let alone middle-class) is pure anathema, "commie-speak", to most Americans I ever had any truck with (directly or indirectly). Rather, I'd say the core belief is that "everyone has the opportunity" to "succeed" (however one defines success). If you don't succeed, that's strictly your personal problem/failure, and don't you dare hint at any external, social factors.

And what's the connection with envying Jesus, even assuming that was actually why he was killed? There's a jump here from prosperity and material goods to envying Jesus... what, popularity? His long blond mane and Nordic baby blues? ;)

Lola (I gave a kitten once to a friend and she named her Lola),

You make a good point. I was not careful with my wording. I do think that Americans have this idea that everyone can be prosperous. Think of Reaganomics - if the rich people prosper then so will everyone! Or if there is a shortage, we just assume that it can be fixed with more efficient means of production (read: technology). Yes, there are situations in which one person getting something pretty obviously excludes others (jobs), but even when job markets are bad there is the belief that if we get the economy running better that problem will be solved too. Theoretically everyone can prosper. Malina argues Jesus' world had the total opposite assumption.

"So the crowd came and began to ask Pilate to do for them according to his custom. Then he answered them, ‘Do you want me to release for you the King of the Jews?’ For he realized that it was out of jealousy that the chief priests had handed him over." (Mark 15:8-10; Matthew 27:18 repeats it)

The envy would be the perceived threat that Jesus had to their own fame and perhaps teaching authority. Envy would also be directed toward someone seen as rising above his/her birth group (family, ethnicity, etc.) Perhaps the latter applied as well. Of course, this is Malina's viewpoint from cultural anthropology - only one discipline's viewpoint.

#20-22 hmm...some hot comments here, especially that envy bit...oversimplified, no?...envy=threat...I can't buy that. But we all can't think alike. Some interesting comments too.

It would be a threat in a culture with an assumption of limited good. If all goods are limited, so is popularity or authority, so it would be a threat. It's even worse since Jesus would be seen as rising above his "station" in life, which the people from his own town take issue with as well. At least this is my reading of Malina.

Well maybe, but then I can't really respond until I've read the New Testament. :)

Stardust, by Neil Gaiman
Finished 6/30/12

Stardust, a "romance within the realms of faerie," tells the story of a half-human, half-faerie hero who ventures into the forest to find a fallen star. His hope: to impress his true love with what he has brought back.

By the cover it would seem that this is another one of Gaiman's famed graphic novels. But instead it's an illustrated novella, spinning a story of three peoples' fate as they try to find the blonde-haired maiden from the night sky. This feels much like Gaiman's other novels, though more palatable for children (except for one sex scene) and more realistic characters then Anansi Boys. But the vibrant illustrations make the story.

Rating: 4/5

I should preface this review: I am in a two-month program in Buddhist Studies at the Rangjung Yeshe Institute at Chokyi Nyima Rinpoche's Ka-Nying Shedrub Ling Monastery in Kathmandu. I see at least a few dozen Tibetan monks walking on the streets every day. My summer program involves both a meditative, monastic, and Western comparative religions approach to Buddhism. I am in Bodhanath, a religious site where many Tibetan Buddhist monasteries have established themselves in exile, and also the location this time focuses upon.

Also as a disclaimer, I mostly skimmed this book to get a new perspective, so while I don't think I have opposed anything Moran says, I couldn't tell you where the line between his ideas and mine is.

Buddhism Observed: Travelers, Exiles, and Tibetan Dharma in Kathmandu, by Peter Moran
Finished 6/30/12

Though one of the poorest countries in Asia, one of Nepal's major exports to the West - and the Western imagination - is Tibetan Buddhism. I ordinarily don't read anthropology dissertations, but as a student of Buddhism in Bodhanath, Kathmandu, I identify not only places he describes but cultural dynamics. I mostly skimmed this book, but it opened up a new lens on my daily activity and personal investment I have in Tibetan Buddhism.

One of Moran's persistent themes is how Westerners come to experience Tibetan Buddhism with certain preconceptions. Orientalist stereotypes die hard: some Westerners see them as hyperspiritual, pure, simple. We/They bring our conceptions of what Buddhism is: focused on meditation as the base practice, also perhaps being literate in the canon. Westeners may have been told about the poverty of Nepal, but even that can become an idealization: they're so poor yet so devoted, they're not like the materialistic West!

The reality is quite different. Moran describes huge trash heaps on the road right outside monasteries. I see beggars invent increasingly deceptive and guilt-manipulating ways to get foreigners' money. Monks are doubly projected-on as both 'members of the cloth' (a projection Western Christians share) and embodiments of an idealized Tibetan Buddhism. Moran describes some Westerners' shock at seeing monks eat at nice restaurants and wear fancy clothes. One of my friends here accidentally caught some monks ogling at a newspaper spread of a bikini-clad model. Moran describes the surprise Westerners feel at the gritty human reality in the midst of the religion they came to see.

Moran also records the complex and subtle ways Tibetan Buddhists adapt to Western conceptions. For example, my understanding is that having an individual teacher in Tibetan Buddhism is unusual for a layperson. Yet many Western Buddhists in Bodhanath see having a lama as a mark of status or proof of one's depth of practice. The fewer students your lama has, the more esteemed it is to be his student. For generous donors to a monastery (mostly Taiwanese or Hong Kongese) there may be pressure to allow them into rituals traditionally reserved for monks. Even donating generously to a monastery can become a status symbol, especially if one doesn't even practice the dharma. Though Westerners hate to see the mixture of business and religion, the reality is that monasteries have to survive. They may not even realize the subtle ways tourism and pilgrimage affects them.

One of my main reactions reading Moran's work was a sigh of gladness that I do not have some of these projections. In fact, people in my class who do irritate me. One young man ranted about how 'real' Buddhism doesn't have any deity-talk, which Tibetan traditions have lots of. A girl in my class, who strikes me as more New Age dilettante than serious practitioner of anything, constantly goes in arms about anything in the sutras we have read that seems even vaguely sexist. She seems to feel that if Buddhism is not a completely egalitarian religion in all its cultural manifestations, there can be no place for her (or her Divine Goddess) in it.

Ironically, I see myself doing very little projection, despite being a member of a religion whose members may have far less open minds than the two above. As a Roman Catholic who (sporadically) practices Zen, Tibetan Buddhism is a completely foreign world to me. But many Western Buddhists come to Buddhism rejecting Christianity, often (I suspect) dissatisfied with the lack of 'authentic spirituality' in parish life or the gap between what is professed and what is practiced by Christians. Hoping to find that authentic spirituality outside the secularized and disenchanted West, they turn to Buddhism to find it. Then they come to Nepal and get shocked. Having already reconciled myself with being in a religion with major flaws in its human expression, I don't have this issue.

What I do feel most of all in Nepal is that I'm a guest. Tibetan Buddhism is not a tradition I can identify myself in. I have far fewer difficulties claiming allegience to Zen, though I prefer to only say "I practice Zen." Is that because I truly like the religion of Zen as I have encountered more? Or is it due to the large cultural gap, i.e. between the meditative way Westerners practice Buddhism and the devotionalism of Tibetan laypeople? I'll have to go to Japan to find out.

Interesting thoughts on Buddhism observed.

Thank you. I posted it (with some additions) to the Buddhism group. We'll see what pops up.

The Language of Gods in the World of Men, by Sheldon Pollock
(Partially) Finished 7/1/12

An initial confession: though you may think I must be very studious and smart for finishing this dense tome pushing 700 pages, in fact I only read the first chapter.

Pollock's masterful study examines the sociolinguistic history of the Sanskrit language in two major phases of change. The first part of the work covers Sanskrit's shift from being a privileged language kept pure for Vedic ritual to its use as a literary language for aesthetic purposes. The second covers the vernacularization of Indian literature, moving away from a literary language, about one milennium later.

My interest in this came up in Buddhist Studies, where the professor spoke about how Sanskrit was considering 'the language of the gods.' Pollock goes deeper into this. Sanskrit in the Vedic context was a language of those who were privileged enough to receieve instruction in it. Its use was largely confined to ritual and sacred texts. Because the Vedas were thought to be uncreated and prior to the universe, the language of the Vedas must be as well. Hence the belief that Sanskrit terms were real and ontologically prior to the actual existence of their referents (autpattika) was more than a scholastic quibble; it was part of the foundation of Vedic culture's religious praxis. Grammar was not simply an instrumental activity to make one's writing better. Sanskrit grammar was an exploration of the very nature of reality as reflected in the language's structure.

One of the first erosions of this theory of language came from Buddhism. Buddhism held that mental formulations were all impermanent, and relation between Sanskrit sounds and referents/definitions was just as arbitary, socially created, and in flux as in any other language. The Buddha, who wanted his teachings to remain available to all, refused to allow his followers to codify his thought in Sanskrit. Yet centuries later, Buddhist philosophy and poetry would be largely written in Sanskrit. Pollock examines different theories of how Sanskrit came to change and why Buddhists came to adopt it. These theories are all rather tentative, especially on the second question!

For example, one of the great works of Buddhist literature at the start of the first millenium is Asvaghosa's Buddhacarita, or "Life of the Buddha." This was in the genre of mahakavya, something like epic poetry. Kavya, or Sanskrit epic poetry in general, included Valmiki's Ramayana. Though the Ramayana is a classic of Hindu literature, it is seen as written by a divinely inspired human author rather than existing uncreated for all time or handed down from the gods.

When kavya was developing as a genre, it was differentiated from Vedas, which were not seen as literature. This echoes for me the observation in The New Testament as Literature: a Very Short Introduction that early Christians such as Augustine decidedly did not think that the New Testament works were literature. They were a separate category, religious texts not art. Modern readings of "Bible as Literature" or "Vedas as Literature" are more modern impositions on the text of a paradigm that its authors didn't think applied. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

Overall, this is over my head but fascinating, and I only read the part I wanted to read. Sacralizing of languages is not limited to Sanskrit. Indeed, I read somewhere that some Jews didn't think Hebrew should be the vernacular of the state of Israel because they didn't want to 'dirty' the sacred language of the Torah by making it the language of the street. Pollock's book makes me want to read more about that as well as delve into great works of Hindu literature and mythology.

#27 - Showing my ignorance, but I'm curious how that Catholicism/Buddhism works for you (or anyone else). Is the Buddhism a curiosity, or can you blend the two religions? I mean, are they not contradictory?

#30 - Modern readings of "Bible as Literature" or "Vedas as Literature" are more modern impositions on the text of a paradigm that its authors didn't think applied. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

A good point in a very interesting review. But at the same time there is a aspect to these texts that are essentially literary in the mechanisms and their sounds, in the way they go about what they do. And seeing that is a way into understanding what these authors were trying to do. For example, many religious texts have repetitive sounds and are essentially meditative. Simply translating this directly into another language would lose this affect completely.

That's why I'm taking ancient Greek this fall...so I can get into Homer, Hesiod, then hopefully skip my way into NT. You're right that many religious texts have qualities of great literature. As we're seeing with Alter. I'm going to try to get into Kugel, maybe tomorrow. :)

For me Buddhism has been a curiosity and practice. On one level, I get a lot out of just studying it. But my practice of Zen meditation has been great for me as well. Now that I'm formally studying Buddhism for the first (real) time I'm wondering if I have been distorting it to make sense with my Christianity. I definitely feel first and foremost a Christian, so things in Buddhism that run up against that like rebirth make it difficult for me to call myself a Buddhist.

I'm in flux.

Thanks for the answer. You're in an interesting flux.

I forgot to put this in Friday! Friday I turned 22. (I like being a multiple of 11, but I dread my next birthday when I will be a prime number.)

My goal for this coming year is to reduce my TBR pile and Amazon wish list (which is just another TBR pile of books I haven't paid for.....yet). My vow is to read two books a week unrelated to school. This has historically been a struggle since every book I read tends to get cited in an essay later and I often try to create a school environment to tackle my TBR, as I did with my spring independent reading contract on psychology and religion.

This week will be short ones....
Look Again by Lisa Scottline (didn't intend to read, but fell in my lap and couldn't put it down, so - done)
Social and Cultural Anthropology: A Very Short Introduction - done
Literary Theory: a Very Short Introduction
Dreamworlds of Shamanism and Tibetan Buddhism: The Third Place by Angela Sumegi - written by my friend's professor.

Next week I'll get back into big stuff.

If I'm good I'll sneak in an extra little one. These Kindles make it very easy to get my fix of Very Short Introductions.

Social and Cultural Anthropology: a Very Short Introduction, by John Monaghan
Finished 7/2/12

Now that I made my aspiration to read two books a week for this coming year of my life, I have already discovered the temptation to just read two *short* books every week. The Very Short Introduction series fills this need, and has provided me with such little tomes as Globalization: a Very Short Introduction and Continental Philosophy: a Very Short Introduction (which actually was so concise it made my head hurt). Monaghan's book, co-written with friend and fellow anthropologist Peter Just, was definitely worth reading, inspired by discussions with a friend who studies anthropology.

Monaghan and Just (hereafter MJ) explain that anthropology is a qualitative, interpretive social science that began in the discourses of colonialism and natural science in the 19th century. Early thinkers were interested in cultural evolution, or broad schemes of how culture develops, and wanted to understand culture by looking at its simplest expression: primitive society. So early anthropologists attempted to find 'primitive' tribes 'untouched' by modernity. Most of these early aims were later found aimless.

The authors combine discussion of contemporary anthropological work with some of the intellectual history of the discipline. In the second chapter, on culture, the term was defined as learned behavior passed down in society. Humans rely on "cultural glasses" to frame all actions and experiences. Sapir even argued for a king of cognitive relativism, in which the way culture (especially language) is structured can lead totally different worlds of understanding of a supposedly simple event. Yet how does one isolate a 'culture'? Is 'America' a culture? California? San Francisco? The Haight?

A lot of the stuff in the religion chapter was review for me. MJ discussed Durkheim's theory that religion's object of worship symbolically stands for the society. For example, YHWH would function as a pointer to the totality of Israelite society, which provides the sort of nomos and life meaning that YHWH is portrayed as doing in the Tanakh. Religion is a model for society and vice versa, as is shown by the fact that the Mosaic covenant in Exodus is patterned after a suzerein treaty between two unequal parties. Cultural change touches religion, particularly leading to millenial movements, cargo cults, charismatic prophets, and syncretistic adoption of an imported missionary religion.

But the most interesting chapter was on different cultures' approchaes to personhood. Some cultures consider one's person to extend beyond the body, perhaps resting in a spirit animal one experiences the consciousness of in dreams. Some cultures consider biological humans outside the realm of personhood, such as babies born a particular time of the year, or include non-homo sapiens in that realm such as rice. I wish they would have addressed some of the psychiatric issues there, such as how MPD is conceptualized in different cultures and perhaps even functions in possession states.

I've always been attracted to the anthropological perspective, and find it useful to understand my own religion and the cultural logic of the forms it takes. I'm not as much a fan of the kind of numbers-driven research more popular in sociology. As MJ point out, numbers don't say much, but the deep context understood by the ethnographer in the field does. MJ's concise work is a definite plus, far better than plowing through an undergraduate textbook. Best of all are the number of recommended works, including examples of ethnographies to get me started.

Rating: 4/5

The book sounds very well done. Enjoyed your review... Also good luck on the 104 books-a-year goal.

Prime numbers become more interesting to me as I age. Not safe, but intriguing in its stead.

Looking forward to your review of the Dreamworlds of Shamanism....

Thank you for the encouragement!

Dreamworlds of Shamanism and Tibetan Buddhism: The Third Place, by Angela Sumegi
Finished 7/6/12

Though I am interested in dreaming and religion, I only ran into this book because she is a professor of a friend's. I'm glad I did. Sumegi's book explores theories and practices of dream interpretation in Buddhism and shamanism and how they come together in interesting ways in Tibetan Buddhism. Although its dense style reads like the doctoral dissertation it was based on, her book provided me with a wealth of information. One of the central questions in her book is how two traditions with very different cosmologies and soteriologies end up sharing similar practices.

Sumegi begins by describing the nature of shamanism as a construct in anthropology and religious studies. Shamanic traditions, she writes, rely on an animistic worldview in which all (or many) things have spirits: disease spirits, weather spirits, mountain spirits, etc. A shaman is a 'ritual specialist' who goes into altered states of consciousness in order to communite with these spirits to fix a problem in his or her community. For example, if someone is sick, the shaman can make a deal with, appease, or even fight the disease spirit to make them go away. This happens in different types of ASCs, from psychoactive plants to the dreams that she focuses on. Shamans have the power to deal with the liminal aspects of human existence such as the lines between life and death and waking and dreaming. These lines tend to be blurred, so that dream influences reality.

Sumegi next dives into theories of dream in the Buddhist context. Because Buddhism arose from Vedic Hinduism, she turns to the Vedas and early Indian Buddhism for background to Tibetan Buddhism. She finds an ambivalence toward dreaming in these traditions. For example, Vedic Hinduism sometimes saw dreams as illusory mental creations, sometimes as real explorations of other realms, and other times as a discovery of the Atman. Like shamanism, Vedic Hinduism stressed the interdependence and hidden relations at work in all things, and the need for ritual specialists (Brahmins) to interact with these relations and the liminal aspects of human life. Nightmares were even considered evil deities one had to protect against with amulets or spells.

Early Buddhism and the later Mahayana tradition took over this ambivalence toward dreams, which Sumegi explores in the third chapter. Because Buddhism tries to overcome concretizing the reality of appearances in waking life, dreams (another state in which one does that) were seen as more illusion. At the same time, dreams were used on the path to liberation. Dream was used as a simile for waking life, which is impermanent and transitory in its true nature. Adepts were encouraged to view all of reality as a dream. Dreams could also be a source of revelation in which one could encounter Buddha or a Buddhist saint who would provide teaching in the dream. Dreams could even be an omen whose validity was determined in large part by the moral merit of the dreamer. Dreams play a large role in the myths of the Buddha's life, from his mother Maya being impregnated in a dream to an ascetic foreseeing Siddhartha's paths of great king or spiritual liberator of humanity in a dream. Dreams also portent various stages on the path to Buddhahood, as shown by the "Five Great Dreams of a Buddha" list. In this context, dream interpretation could be both a matter of omens for practical life or tied into Buddhist liberation. But the category of dreams that were just memory or created experience was also at play. Dreams were viewed with both interest and suspicion by the tradition.

Sumegi's fourth chapter explores the history of Tibetan Buddhism, Tantric practices, and shamanism. In its early years in Tibet, Buddhism had harsh competition with the indigenous shamanic practices such as Bon. Clerics in both traditions would do exorcism, healing, divination, and other folk rituals. Sumegi argues that Tibetans had three main goals in their religious system: Buddhic, Karmic, and pragmatic. On the Buddhic level, dreams worked their way into Tantric practice. This development of the Vajrayana school of Buddhism in Tibetan sought to provide an intense, fast track to enlightenment. Despite all the sex Westerners assume "Tantra" refers to, that is actually a small part of these practices involving deities. One Tantric practice is dream yoga, which goes beyond dreams as omens or metaphors for the nature of reality, and uses dreams as an arena of practice. On the Karmic level, Tibetans saw a parallel between the transition from
life -> death -> bardo (realm between rebirths) -> life
and
waking -> dreamless sleep -> dreams -> waking
If one learned to be cognizant in dreams and recognize dream states, then one could also be cognizant of the process of rebirth. Perhaps this would lead to a better rebirth (?). On the pragmatic level, lamas would even compete with local shamans, showing that they were better at these rituals, better at influencing the deities. At the same time, the lamas would emphasize the different orientation they had to these rituals. They were counseled to be detached from these omens and rituals, and their moral path emphasized perfection and the overcoming of ignorance rather than the moral harmony of good and evil in the shamanic tradition. Lamas took refuge in the Three Jewels, while shamans took 'refuge' in local deities. In this way the lamas would perform shamanic rituals while differentiating themselves from shamans by their intentions and soteriological ends.

Sumegi's final chapter explores contemporary dream practice in Tibetan Buddhism, finding a lot of this similar ambivalence and appropriation of shamanic practice. Even now, lamas perform divinations for Tibetans alongside meditation instruction for Westeners! Sumegi looks at traditional Tibetan medicine, hagiography and biography for material. Medical texts list seven different types of dreams, using them as part of diagnosing an illness. The night is divided into three parts, and only dreams in the third part of the night are valid omens. Buddhist teachers also view dreams as a possible sign of good practice or a deity consenting to a deity practice. Dreams can also be a site of tendrels, or auspicious omens. Tendrels are a connection between different things arising from the interdependence of reality, connections often hidden. Perhaps this is similar to Jung's concept of synchronicity.

While Sumegi has boatloads of information on the connection between psychology, culture, and religion, her book isn't very clear about its own argument. Sumegi's main point seems to be that the ambivalence about dreams in the Buddhist tradition springs not from a distinction between elite, doctrinal Buddhism and folk Buddhism, but instead from the interplay between absolute truth (appearances, concrete things) and ultimate truth (emptiness). She quotes Milarepa, who wrote that he had transcended the illusion of dreams - which was what allowed him to interpret them! And while Sumegi does make some interesting points about the differing soteriologies of Buddhism and shamanism, I wish she had done more analysis and less literature review. For example, she provided several lists of different dream symbols and motifs in Tibetan Buddhism, but I was left curious how the tradition decided whether a motif was a good or bad omen. So not the best academic book in the world, the amount of information in it made it worth my time. If you really want to blaze through this book, the most valuable information was in chapters 1, 4, and 5.

This book raises another question for me: how does one tradition appropriate another's practice into its own worldview and spiritual path? Buddhists took in shamanic ritual - did that distort either? As I see Christians and Jews taking up Buddhist meditative practices, I wonder if there are parallels between the two.

Rating: 3/5

Interesting review of Dreamworlds of Shamanism and Tibetan Buddhism. I sounds like you have done a great job in unpicking this academic text for the rest of us.

I couldn't help thinking back to all those Carlos Casteneda books I read ages ago

A great example of one religion taking over another's traditions was of course the Christians taking over pagan traditions.

> 39

Thank you :)

Is Carlos Castaneda worth reading?

Now that you mention him I think of that old movie William Hurt starred in, Altered States.

One wonders though - how much is the practice of Buddhist meditation (or any particular kind, say zazen) separable from Buddhist 'theory'?

I agree with Bas. Enjoyed your review a lot, but I'm not likely to pursue the book.

What is your impression regarding the composition of Westerners there, I suppose those with goals similar to yours--is it mostly Americans, or what?

> 42

Westerners still stand out like a sore thumb here. I kind of wish my skin was darker so I wouldn't be so odd. And I'm in one of the parts of Kathmandu popular with tourists!

In my summer program there are around 75-80 students and slightly less than half are American. It's the biggest nationality here. But the program is in English so there is already a bias toward us.

But not everyone in my program is practicing Buddhism. There are language courses that get visiting grad students like the Sanskrit program or the Tibetan program (very popular).

The Christ and the Bodhisattva, ed. Donald S. Lopez and Steven C. Rockefeller
Finished 7/8/12

This anthology is a collection of talks given at a conference in 1985 at Middlebury College. Big-name scholars and religious figures were invited to give talks related to the title's theme. When I picked this volume up at the book store and saw names like Donald S. Lopez, Ann Ulanov, Brother David Steindl-Rast, Robert Thurman, and the Dalai Lama, I knew I could not go wrong.

And I didn't. My favorite essays were Thurman's, Ulanov's, and Steindl-Rast's. Thurman's essay details the path of the bodhisattva, a lot of which I've been learning in my classes here in Kathmandu. Like the Christ, the bodhisattva is a courageous "savior" of humanity in Mahayana Buddhism's soteriological system. The bodhisattva takes a vow to strive for liberation, not just for themselves but for all sentient beings. As such a bodhisattva vow may take eons of rebirths to fulfill. The bodhisattva is constantly striving for wisdom (realization of emptiness) and boundless compassion. Thurman traces the development of the bodhisattva concept in Buddhism to the need for a more "messianic" way to practice, away from just monasticism. Once this ideal became established, writers such as Shantideva wrote beautiful treatises on the virtues of a bodhisattva, and methods of practice such the sevenfold precept and exchange of self for other came about. A bodhisattva considers their joy and suffering as important as everyone else's, and they will act as selflessly as possible to perfect their wisdom and compassion and increase others'. Thurman also explains some of the "apocalyptic" practices of Tantric or Vajrayana Buddhism and some tales of the divine bodhisattvas such as Manjusri and Avalokiteshvara. Overall his account of the bodhisattva and her virtues was very profound.

Ulanov, a Christian Jungian analyst, wrote an essay on "The God You Touch." Ulanov begins with the idea that the Christian God, the incarnate God, is not some abstract principle. This is a God you can touch, a God who touches you. Ulanov analyzes some of the psychological dynamics of this touch. She looks at how our fear of God's touch, of being transformed by some total Other, can make us try to put God into categories that She won't fit. Our efforts to make God relevant for today, or for women for example, run the risk of creating an idol. This touch can also be dangerous, for in order to begin to transcend one's self one must have a stable and sane ego-self. Yet this transcendence takes us back into the world, to show love for others, to bear our crosses with consent. Ulanov remarks that while depth psychology teaches we must respect our urge to bring our I-self into relation with a non-ego - in Jungian terms the unconscious. This requires us to detach from all the concerns and values of the I-self. Ulanov sees this as the point where psychology leaves off and theology takes over to tell us about this relationship with God.

I won't detail the rest of the essays, but since they came from a speech they all had an informal quality to them lacking in most academic writing. Langdon Gilkey wrote about the dynamic between affirming and negating the world in Christianity. Donald S. Lopez explained how the Dalai Lama tradition started and what the current one has undergone in his politically upsetting life. Overall, a great book, and the transcript of the panel discussion at the end is just dessert. I will leave you with some quotes from it below.

Rating: 5/5

"'Our heritage is now the world'...By that one means not that the religions will be watered down and syncretized and reduced to one form, but rather the development of a world religious consciousness means that people in their religious lives and ethical lives will be able to draw on the full richness of all the many different religious traditions in the world." (229)

"The differences between Buddhism and Christianity have generated in me a certain sense of the importance of history, of the importance of social action ... and a certain rediscovery of the element of grace in Buddhism, which I think is there but I had missed it until I started talking to Christians and suddenly realized it is actually there." (237)

"On this planet I think there are more than four billion human beings. I usually see them in three cateories: one category, I think the majority, are those who are simply neglecting any spiritual value, simply concentrating on money. Then, another cateory includes those who accept the value of religion and follow it as much as they can. Another category deliberately abandons and denies any value of religion. ... There is a difference in the amount of mental peace, mental satisfaction, inner stability you see in these two groups. I feel that the people who have some spiritual belief have some basis for their hope and courage." - His Holiness the Dalai Lama (249)

There are plenty of values other than money and religion in the world, someone memo His Holiness.

Question about the "saving" functions of the bodhisatvas: what exactly would these be: teaching, preaching?

(Because an explicit parallel is being drawn between Christ and bodhisatvas, I should add I have never understood exactly how Christ's sacrifice "saved" or could possibly "save" humanity.)

Incidentally, how does a Tibetan Buddhist regard Christ's crucifixion, it's supposed soteriological function?

Interesting as always...although my first thought is along the lines of Lola's response to the Dalai Lama.

> 45, 46

I think there is truth to what the Dalai Lama said in that many people give very little thought to religion. There are a lot who give lip service to it but little more. I look at America, which often calls itself a "Christian nation," but there is very, very little that even approaches Christ in our foreign policy, how we treat the poor, the marginalized, how we focus so much on holding on to position and status and money. And so for Westerners, for Americans in an affluent society, money really is the big Thing To Pursue, from what I've seen.

I think Tibetan Buddhism would see Christ as perhaps a great moral teacher. There are some Buddhists who hold that bodhisattvas can be found outside Buddhism, that great selfless teachers from other religions could be bodhisattvas, so Christ might be a bodhisattva. Think of it as the Buddhist equivalent of Rahner's "anonymous Christian."

Because the fundamental problem in Buddhism is escaping the ongoing suffering of samsara (ongoing cycle of rebirth) and achieving liberation, in Mahayana Buddhism the idea of the bodhisattva is one who vows to liberate all sentient beings. This is contrasted in Mahayana polemic to the "Lesser Vehicle" of those who only wish to achieve their own liberation from samsara, including Therevadins. So the bodhisattva vow lasts multiple lifetimes, and when one considers the vast number of sentient beings in the universe the vow may never be fulfilled. But the courageous nature of the vow is also important. So the bodhisattva would do things like teach the Dharma, but even in little everyday things the bodhisattva strives to show such compassion and wisdom that that itself can teach others.

I've heard a number of different perspectives on Christ's saving power. Like the bodhisattva, Christ taught not just by his words showing others how to relate to God, one another, and bring about the kingdom, but also by his actions. I have yet to understand the Resurrection in all its glory. One way to think about it as Christ as the lamb. Like a lamb being offered for sacrifice, he was the scapegoat, in some way, for the whole world, so that all sin was put onto him who was God incarnate. But ask me to unpack that and I'm lost.

Very interesting review, and an interesting debate. Although I am not much for Christian apologetics, I do think that Lewis was right when he said that:

A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a good moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic - on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg - or else he would be the Devil of Hell.

Although some of Jesus' teachings attain the level of, I don't know, "enlightened (revealed?) morality", many of the sayings attributed to him by the Evangelists would, I assume, horrify Tibetan Buddhists (of whom I do not know nearly enough to say that it would definitely horrify them). Matthew 10:34 being apposite:

Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.

> 48

I've never been much of a fan of Lewis' apologetics, though I love his novels. One of the worst experiences of my reading life was when I was reading Perelandra and found, on page 141, that some previous handler of the book had ripped out ten pages. Of course I put the book down, unable to continue. That was a month ago.

Lewis might not have anticipated the findings of historical-critical "Historical Jesus" research that can find a way out of his false dilemma. Some say the good moral teacher stuff was historical, while the stuff that would make Jesus a lunatic if not true ("I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life" and Messianic claims) was not the historical Jesus but later additions by early Christian communities.

My understanding of that passage is not that Jesus literally came to bring violence. That statement would flatly contradict "turn the other cheek" and "give him your cloak." I think he was pointing out to his disciples that the Christian life would divide people - so much so that even family ties, so important in first-century Mediterranean culture, would be divided. The communities that produced the Gospels were already experiencing persecution, so it only makes sense they would emphasize Jesus' warning to his disciples about the risk of discipleship. Jesus got the sword too, only on a literal level it was a much slower, more painful death than that.

Also, I know the Dalai Lama talks a lot about nonviolence, but I'm not sure every Tibetan Buddhist at all times and places has been a pacifist. One of my professors in college pointed out that pacificism doesn't work without a media behind it. So Tibetans don't need to actually rebel against China, they just get the rest of the world (via mass media) to find out what the Chinese are doing and everyone else will put pressure on China to let off. The Dalai Lama, as a highly charismatic religious figure who radiates compassion, is a damned likeable media face for Tibet's plight.

In the Beginning: A Short History of the Hebrew Language, by Joel Hoffman
Finished 7/13/12

One of my systematic and efficient ways to approach my TBR pile in the next year (which includes physical books, Kindle books, and a 14-page Amazon wishlist) is by clumping them into reading themes of 5-10 books to be read in succession. I'm hoping that this will not only promote synergy from reading many books on the same topic, but also help me tackle entire sections of my library.

The current topic: Biblical Hebrew language and literature. I've spent a year in Biblical Hebrew and start Greek this fall. While studying Hebrew I wished I had some auxiliary texts that would have fun info about Hebrew without being dense textbooks. This is that theme.

Joel Hoffman: In the Beginning: A Short History of the Hebrew Language
Joel Hoffman: And God Said: How Translations Conceal the Bible's Original Meaning
Robert Chisholm: From Exegesis to Exposition
Moises Silva: God, Language, and Scripture: Reading the Bible in the Light of General Linguistics
Joseph Lowin: Hebrew Talk: 101 Hebrew Roots and the Stories They Tell
Robert Alter: The Art of Biblical Poetry
Robert Alter: The Art of Biblical Narrative

In that spirit, I've already finished Joel Hoffman's In The Beginning: A Short History of the Hebrew Language. I remember one day studying with the rabbi, I asked him if modern Hebrew is really the same as Biblical Hebrew. He chuckled and said that Israelis like to think it is. Hoffman's work disentangles the many different kinds of Hebrew in ancient documents. He brings together his background in Biblical scholarship and linguistics to provide a readable and insightful history of the Hebrew language useful for the student of Hebrew. He demystifies a lot of the religious ideology surrounding Hebrew. Readers should not that Hoffman is Jewish so for him "the Bible" does not include the New Testament. But that should not deter any Christians from reading this valuable work. Here I will roughly sum up each chapter and end with my thoughts.

After laying out his scientific modus operandi, Hoffman sets forth his theory in chapter three that Hebrew was the first alphabetic language. He sets forth four different types of writing systems:
1. Logographic, such as Chinese;
2. Syllabic;
3. Consonantal (early Hebrew); and
4. Alphabetic.
Hoffman argues (from admittedly scant evidence) that around 1000 BCE, three letters used for consonants were adapted to also be used as vowels. These letters were yud, hey, and vav, which respectly could stand for i/e, a/ah, and i/u. Though this was not the full development of vowel pointing as used by the Masoretes, even these few vowels were a sea change. The complicated and unphonetic system of Hebrew writing had worked because only a few highly trained scribes ever wrote, but it also restricted writing to these highly trained scribes. Alphabetic systems made writing possible. By taking the Phoenician alphabet and adapting it to express vowel sounds, Hebrew-speakers revolutionized human language.

In chapter four, "Magic Letters and the Name of God," Hoffman reviews how crucial Hebrew's alphabet is. Though some of these links are more tenuous than others, Hoffman traces many writing systems of the world back to Hebrew: Roman and Cyrillic through Greek, Arabic through Aramaic, and even Indian writing systems. Hoffman also argues that these new vocalic letters, yud, hey, and vav, became cultural trademarks for Hebrews, marks of pride. This explains why Sarai became Sarah, why the plural of El became Elohim rather than Elim, and even why these three letters comprise the Tetgrammaton, the sacred name of God in the Torah. Even in later manuscripts written in later "Block Hebrew" (like a more modern font), the Tetragrammaton was written in an archaic style, as if it was a symbol for something. Furthermore, there is no agreed-on etymology for this unpronounceable name, and Hoffman takes care of that by saying there need be none.

In chapter five, "The Masoretes," Hoffman explores these scribal schools and some of their differences. Though we often speak of this group who worked from 600-800 CE as unitary, in fact there were many different schools of Masoretes: Tiberian, Babylonian, Palestinian, and so on. Masoretes are not only important for introducing punctuation and vowel pointings (diacritics) into the text, making pronunciation must more explicit, but they also produced the oldest Hebrew Bible manuscript known. This is the Leningrad Codex (from 1009 CE), which modern Hebrew Bibles are based on. Since the Lengingrad Codex uses the Tiberian pointing system, this school effectively won out over the others. Part of the Masoretes' diacritic system is the dagesh, which affects some consonants (the BeGaD KeFaT consonants) to make them either voiced or unvoiced. Despite this fanfare, some skepticism about the Masoretes remains. Hoffman argues (from some very technical data) that in at least one respect their writing system could not have matched spoken Hebrew, and so there could be other respects in which they invented rather than preserved the Bible's pronunciation. Since we have no pre-Masorete complete manuscripts we cannot know.

Chapter six, "Pronunciation," was pretty technical. The main question here is whether or not Tiberian Masoretic pronunciation was the same as Biblical pronunciation. Overall: probably not. But finding evidence for this is hard. Modern Hebrew is useless, as are comparisons to other Semitic languages of the time (known even less). Hoffman turns to the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Tanakh. By looking at transliterations and doubled letters in the Septuagint, Hoffman finds that the Masoretes were fairly close to the original Biblical Hebrew in consonants but not vowel pronunciation. For example, the Masorete's "Chava" (Eve) was "Eua" in the Septuagint. So the later "v" was a "u" sound and the "ch" (the "throat-clearing" sound) was more like "h". By looking at this and Origen's Hexapla, Hoffman sums up the differences between Masoretic and Biblical Hebrew: the vav sound, the differences between stops and fricatives in the BeGaD KeFaT letters, and the vowels in general.

Chapter Seven leads us into the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS). Hoffman sums up the great story of how the scrolls were discovered, studied, and disseminated. In 1947 a Bedouin found some scrolls in a cave, scrolls that contained 2 copies of Isaiah, a commentary on Habukkuk, a targum of Genesis, an apocalyptic war scroll, and a list of rules for a community. After 10 more caves, 50 years, 15000 scrolls fragments, and decades of backstabbing and intrigue, the text of the Scrolls can be purchased in any bookstore. Through dating we can surmise that they were written from the 3rd century BCE to 68 CE. The DSS contain community rules, Halakhic texts, Biblical texts (both canonical and non), and literary, poetic, liturgical, eschatological, exegetical, and astrological texts. There is even a copper scroll listing burial places of golden treasure, none of which has ever been found.

The reigning theory is that the DSS were produced by Qumran, a religious community described by Josephus as apocalyptic and separatist. The DSS are the largest corpus of pre-Masorete Hebrew we have. We find that DSS scribes used more vowels than the Bible, adding yuds, heys, and vavs to make the text more phonetically clear. The Tetragrammaton was written in an archaic script. Grammatically, the DSS use double-plural compounds, like "tools of wars," and Biblically there are major and minor differences, includuing an entire added passage in Samuel 11.

Hoffman then moves into Biblical dialects for chapter 8. Again, it's silly to assume there is one "Biblical Hebrew." The Bible was written over hundreds of years and it stands to reason the writing system changed. After the exile in 586 BCE, a new trend known as "Late Biblical Hebrew" (LBH) emerged. LBH is the intermediate point between "Biblical Hebrew" and DSS Hebrew. Like DSS Hebrew, it adds extra vowels to give words "fuller" spellings, but unlike DSS lacks double-verb compounds. It also lacks the double verbs of BH, which were used to mark emphasis, e.g. "David fight fought." (David is particularly important for studying LBH because many of the comparisons are between Samuel/Kings and the later retellings in Chronicles.) One delightful result into different Hebrew dialects is the ability to look at a text's dialect and guess when it was written, though since dialects are differentiated by texts' composition dates this leads to a nice circularity. More importantly, how do we know LBH changes were actual changes in the Hebrew and not changes by later Masorete scribes? This seems unlikely, since if the Masorete scribes were editing for consistency they would edit out all differences between BH and LBH. Even spelling differences were not "covered up" by the Masoretes.

Chapter nine goes into "Post-Biblical Hebrew." One stage of this is Rabbinical Hebrew. When the Jews were under Persian rule, they learned Aramaic, and once under Greek rule learning Greek they were often trilingual. Then somewhere around 200 CE, Hebrew ceased being a spoken language and was only used for liturgy and study. Rabbinical Hebrew sources are mostly liturgical prayers, the Mishnah, and midrash. Rabbinical Hebrew shows far more diversity than Biblical Hebrew does - but perhaps that is only because rabbinical sources were copied less carefully and some scribes would "correct" rabbinical words to match Biblical ones. Rabbinical Hebrew uses double vowels to express consonants, and uses yud-nun to express plural nouns rather than only yud-mem (this was borrowed from Aramaic). It also brought in hundreds of loan words from Greek, often expressing concepts not in the Hebrew Bible such as "lawyer." The grammar was much like LHB, including double plural compounds. Hoffman hypothesizes that at some point Rabbinical Hebrew must have been spoken, because some of the changes it made would not have happened to a purely written language. However, it ended around 476 BC when it became a dead language, used only for literature. (I wish he had discussed if synagogues for the next millenium conducted services in vernacular.) Later forms of "non-spoken Hebrew" included Masoretic, Muslim Spain, and 18th century European Hasidim.

The real fun begins again with Modern Hebrew. In 1882, Ittamar Ben-Ave was born. He was the son of Eliezer Ben-Yehuda, a talented linguaphile and Lithuanian Jew who wanted to bring back Hebrew as a spoken lingua franca of the Jewish world. He raised his son to only speak Hebrew, making his son the first native speaker of the language in ~1700 years. Ben-Yehuda, through popular dictionaries and coining his own words, encouraged other Jews to do the same, making 50,000 native speakers by World War I and 350,000 by the founding of Israel in 1948. Since then the number has shot up to six million. Modern Hebrew's pronunciation tends to be a mix of Sepharidic and Ashkenic, and its grammar has taken elements from German, Russian, and English (e.g. in word order). There still rage furious debates about issues such as:
- How to create new words - do we transliterate from foreign languages or keep the language "pure" and use Hebrew roots?
- Spelling - which is now in major crisis, particularly around vowels. The official vowel pointing rules of the Israeli Academy that dictates language are so arcane that even educated people can't remember them, so even standard spellings of many words are variant.
As a descriptive linguist Hoffman doesn't really care for these debates. And I have to agree.

The great thing about Hoffman's book is that he is technical without being too technical. Even a basic knowledge of the alphabet and pronunciation of Hebrew is enough to understand his book. This book has reinvigorated my study of Hebrew, a language of many firsts. I only wish he had talked a bit about the Vulgate, because Jerome translated from the Hebrew and I wonder if that would give us any clues about the Hebrew of Jerome's day.

(I'm sorry this is so LONG; I do this less to be readable and more to help me retain the material.)

No apologies necessary. Its great to read thoughts/reviews of books that one would never read. You learn so much.

It's definitely a specific book. I'm not on Hoffman's other book and it is equally edifying.

The Snow Leopard, by Peter Matthiessen
Finished 7/14/12

Matthiessen's memoir, in journal format, recounts his adventures hiking through the Himalayas with his biologist friend George Schaller. Though the ostensive reason for the trip was Schaller's fieldwork on the blue sheep of the Himalayas, Matthiessen seeks for some kind of transformation on the trip. He details he and Schaller's arudous hikes, the villages they go through, their sometimes frustrating dealings with unreliable sherpas and porters, and the earth and its inhabitants they pass through. But Matthiessen makes the work personal by foraying into memories of his late wife, his children left with George's wife, and how the vastness and quiet of his trip strikes the root of his Buddhist practice.

I really liked this book, which was a needed light read. Matthiessen is very quotable. Though I'm not trekking through the Himalayas, being in Nepal is close enough to read the book. In fact today's hike, on dirt paths surrounded by rice patties and punctuated by small villages, brought me into many of the same kinds of villages Matthiessen saw. Despite the rapid change in Kathmandu, the country folks' lives look little different externally than the nearly 40 years ago Matthiessen went on his journey.

Rating: 4/5

> 49

Thanks for taking so much time to respond to what were really only off-hand comments on my part. As I mentioned, I do not really know nearly enough about Buddhism to make an educated statement about its tenets (which of course, like Christianity, are not uniform).

Also, I'm not so sure that Lewis is really presenting a false dilemma, at least, not wholly. Sincere believers are probably not particularly swayed by historical research into Jesus: most believers are probably not even aware of the historical-critical research. My own beliefs are quite ambiguous: I oscillate between theistic existentialism and protest atheism (the oscillation may indicate a degree of agnosticism). So I do not really care a great deal about the historicity of Jesus. Defining Jesus as a historical character, although not inconsequential, seems to have little to do with what people ultimately believe about Jesus. Then again, their faith seems to rest on a belief that Jesus actually existed, so maybe this is a point on which I diverge from the bulk of Christians.

(Hoping that last paragraph isn't too incoherent)

I am ashamed to admit that I have never read any of Lewis's fiction - except The Screwtape Letters, which, although not terrible, is a bit polemical for my cup of tea. I hope you find the rest of Perelandra some time; you seem to have been enjoying it.

Good reviews of the Hoffman and the Matthiessen. I have Shadow Country on the shelf, and hope to get to it soon.

Your review of The Snow Leopard, brought back some memories for me, I read it decades ago.

> 54

No, thank YOU. I enjoy getting feedback on here (Yay, someone cares!) and it helps me clarify my thoughts to type them out for others.

Lewis' Out of the Silent Planet trilogy is also very didactic, much more than the Chronicles of Narnia. Perelandra in particular is more like a Platonic dialogue than something with a conventional plot. Maybe like Ayn Rand.

I'm interested to hear more about how you oscillate between the two. Having used to be atheist I can see that position a lot better than many Christians I know. I can see what you mean about Historical Jesus research not seeming relevant to the average Joe in the pew, but it's still a way out of the dilemma.

It really is a good way out of the dilemma to say that the historicity of Jesus doesn't matter. But to me it seems like if there never was any human who lived in such radical intimacy of God, then our hope that we can is unfounded.

Interesting last post. Enjoyed your reviews, including all the detail in post 50. Matthiessen is on my TBR. I've started In Shadow Country twice, but got distracted by other things both times. Will try again.

And God Said: How Translations Conceal the Bible's Original Meaning, Joel M. Hoffman
Finished 7/16/12

Joel Hoffman, Biblical linguist, has a bone to pick with English translations of the Bible. Simply put, they lack an adequate understanding of linguistic theory, and veer far too much to the side of word-for-word translations. Hoffman argues that literal, word-by-word translations often miss some of the most important aspects of a text.

Hoffman begins with the KJV. Few serious scholars argue that the KJV rivals the accuracy of modern translations such as the NAB, NIV, or NRSV. Yet despite the KJV's now-defunct (and confusing!) English, its poor knowledge of Hebrew, and its even poorer knowledge of translation theory, all these modern versions work from it.

From here Hoffman begins to explain how translation works. It seems obvious: first, you find out what the original Hebrew means. Then, you find a suitable English idiom in which to express it. Seems simple, but Hoffman accuses many translators of not even being able to do the first. He lists three bad ways to find the meaning of a word:
1. Internal word structure. Deriving the meaning of "translator" from "translate" works. But what about "patently"? Is "hostile" similar to "host"?
2. Etymology: "Philosophy" is an easy example where etymology gives you a reasonable idea of what the word means. But what about "understand"?
3. Cognate languages: Always tempting, but as every Spanish learner embarrassingly discovers, "embarazada" in Spanish is not the same as "embarrassed" in English.
The proper way to find a word's meaning, Hoffman argues, is by context. While we can run into such dangerous things as homynyms and metonymy, this is the most foolproof method.

Moving from the Hebrew to English is similarly complicated. Of the five levels of meaning of any Hebrew utterance, the translator can't accurately recreate them all. These levels - sounds, words, phrases, concepts, and affect - interplay and change importance based on context. For example, sounds are not important for most prose translation, but what if the phrase has a pun or an alliteration that adds to the meaning? An extreme example: Hebrew poetry works mostly on parallelism, while English poetry traditionally runs on meter and rhyme. Should Hebrew poetry be put into rhyming meter to make it sound poetic to English ears?

Phrases that make sense in Hebrew similarly don't always translate well. The phrase "X of Xs" in Hebrew means "the ultimate" or "the best," as in Handel's famous "King of Kings" and "Lord of Lords." But "Song of Songs" in English sounds a little strange - perhaps a song about other songs, or a song made up of strung-together smaller songs. As for concepts, if 5 PM in one language's culture is dinnertime, should that be translated as "8 PM" in a more night-owly culture? The French word for horse is "cheval," but while a French reader may think "French horse" when she reads "cheval," an American reader might think "English horse" when he reads "horse." Affect, the fifth level of meaning, is even harder to translate. 10 km in a metric culture is a nice round number, like a stranger on the street directing you, "The gas station is in 10 km." But a literal translation of this into an American system sounds technical: "The gas station is in 6.2137 miles." Language does more than convey information, as it is enmeshed in and conveys underlying affects and concepts of culture. In the Hebrew Bible, it conveys poetry through chiasmus and parallelism. It conveys different registers of formality and linguistic usage, despite the fact that translations tend to make the entire text one register (KJV formal, NRSV colloquial, NIV chatty). Hoffman leads the reader to the conclusion that even the most scholarly, respected, modern translations focus far too much on the second level (words), even when the other levels are more important.

The rest of Hoffman's book applies this analysis to oft-quoted passages in the Bible. "Love the Lord with all your heart (levav), soul (nephesh), and might" becomes "Love the Lord with your mind and body and power to change the world," as "levav" and "nephesh" refer respectively to the invisible and visible aspects of the human person. "The Lord is my shepherd (ro'eh)" doesn't have any English equivalent, as the meek shepherd of the modern imagination was a fierce, highly respected, physically powerful, and romantic protector of the week. What career has all those connotations in America? (The same goes for Biblical epithets of God as King.)

The funniest mistranslation he encounters is the incestuous "my sister (kalah), my spouse (achot)" in the Song of Solomon. Rather than being a literal sister, familial terms were used in the ancient world to convey status, as a king would refer to an equally powerful king as "brother" and a more powerful king as "father." Also, kalah refers to a lover of some sort, but not necessarily a spouse. "My sister, my spouse" becomes "my equal, my lover." "Thou shalt not kill (r'tasch)" actually refers to illegal killing, not the accepted blood redemption (revenge) or the prescribed killing of idol worshippers. "Thou shalt not covet (chamad)" doesn't refer to just wanting something, but more specifically to taking it temporarily and fostering thoughts of keeping it permanently, bringing in both intention and action. And most famously, "a virgin (alma) shall conceive" refers to a "young woman," which in ancient Hebrew society would have usually implied "virgin" (in the same way "teenager" implies "high schooler" in the modern USA). But that is only an implication, not watertight, and one that would not hold nowadays.

Overall, Hoffman's book was a great read, a big help in my ongoing study of Biblical languages. His appendix evaluating different translations and recommending more books was also useful (hint: he favors the NRSV and Robert Alter's translations). But his point is often too strongly stated. While it is true that many of the key words he expertly traces different uses of are often impossible to translate on all five levels of meaning, he seems to forget that any serious study Bible has footnotes explaining these things. My NRSV can explain that shepherds had to fight off wild animals attacking their herd, so were not men to pick a fight with. Footnotes can explain what the idiom "Song of Songs" means in Hebrew. So while he criticized other translations for sticking to literal word-for-word meaning too much, he could also have made the less daring assertion that translations should have better footnotes explaining difficult-to-translate words. And at the end of the day, I would still much rather have a literal translation with good footnotes. Departing from that risks sinking into the morass of paraphrase "translations" such as the Living Bible or The Message - works that he rightly criticizes. Even so, I recommend Hoffman, only with the caveat that he is not the only voice in translation theory applied to the Bible.

Rating: 4/5

Great review of And God Said: How translations Conceal the Bible's original meaning.

Interesting. I agree with your last paragraph completely. My preference for this kind of translation is for the translator to make the best flawed effort, and clarify with the footnotes. Of course other readers may feel differently.

And God Said: How translations Conceal the Bible's original meaning sounds fascinating. Years ago I went to a church where the pastor was fluent in both Greek (since he was Greek) and Hebrew and most of our Bible studies revolved around his teaching the Old & New testament in the original languages. Fascinating stuff. Loved your review.

> 61

You had a real gift. Many pastors and priests don't learn it in seminary - and then how many remember? I know in my Catholicism, I think many M.Div programs don't even require Hebrew. Glad to hear you had a pastor who took the languages seriously. :)

Agh! Book bullet! In other words I ordered myself a copy of And God Said after reading your review.

I've given it a thumbs up.

> 63

Yeah, you join LT to get reading done, but then you just find more books....

Wisdom Energy: Basic Buddhist Teachings by Lama Yeshe and Lama Zopa Rinpoche
Finished 7/19/12

This book is a collection of talks given by these two lamas on a tour of the U.S. in the 1970s. Although the teachings in the book are much the same as what I am learning in my Buddhism classes here at Rangjung Yeshe Institute in Nepal, the way they are presented is very different. Lamas Yeshe and Zopa tend to keep a lot of the more technical terms and lists of practice aspects out of the book and focus more on the basics: learning how to train the mind, how to deal with attachment and grasping, how to approach studying the dharma.

What I find most important about the dharma to me now is looking at how many of the thoughts and concepts we create about ourselves and the world around us are really reified delusions - things we invent but think are real. So we dislike another person for 'their' traits when in fact we project those traits onto them. We feel like we're unable to do something because we create a self-definition based on our inability. Seeing how this process of delusion creates and recreates itself in the mind is fundamental to being free from ignorant thoughts. Most importantly, the dharma is something to be taken in, internalized, reflected and lived out, not just memorized once and mastered in a formulaic way.

Overall, a useful book. Too bad Lama Yeshe has passed.

Rating: 5/5

The Alchemist by Paulo Coelho
Finished 7/20/12

What would you do to actualize your inner calling? This theme of one's dreams and how one relates to them seems to permeate Paulo Coelho's wildly successful and numerous novels. In The Alchemist, the hero leaves his Spanish pastoral life as a shepherd to find a hidden treasure at the Pyramids of Egypt. Guided by helpers such as King Melchizedek, a crystal merchant, and an Arabic alchemist, he searches for his treasure and finds himself transformed in the process.

Coelho's parabolic novels tend to involve highly unrealistic dialogues, in which characters speak pointedly and directly of fate, of deep aspirations, of the timeless and universal flow of their temporal and particular lives. In this novel, the lessons are clear: don't be afraid to follow your dreams. Don't get distracted by settling for the smaller ones. Trust in omens and signs, and be open to help from unusual places. In other words, follow your heart. And most of all, trust in God. (Coelho is Catholic.)

Just like reading By the River Piedra I Sat Down and Wept, I did not find this novel gripping, or realistic, or suspenseful, but I came away from it feeling like I could somehow find my dreams better. My mind also wandered back to my spring project in psychology and religion, looking at Coelho's rhetoric of the spiritual path and its ties to the psychologies produced by our culture. I sense Jungian and Maslowian resonances in this writer. But that's a paper for another day.

Rating: 3/5

Some really interesting books reviewed recently, Jonathan.

" Seeing how this process of delusion creates and recreates itself in the mind is fundamental to being free from ignorant thoughts."

I can't help feeling that humankind is meant to live in ignorance. The constant striving for, but never reaching is part of the human condition. This is why I can never fully understand commitment to a 'path to the truth'....

Having said that, it is interesting to understand what the various paths to the truth are, because that helps broaden our horizons as to where the human imagination can stretch to.

Interesting thoughts on The Alchemist, which I guess many people find inspirational and this probably accounts for its popularity. I have not read any of Coelho's books because I think all that home spun philosophy would stick in my throat - but that's just me.

> 67

A fittingly deep post for someone named after a philosopher. (Even if an annoying one.) Isn't the "search for truth" (however vaguely construed) one of the great things about being human? One of the almost-instinctual things? No other species (that I know of, on this planet) can search for truth, whether factual knowledge or spiritual liberation.

> 68

Yes, Coelho can get kinda sappy and maybe oversentimental for some people. I just wouldn't call it "philosophy" so much as inspiration or spiritual teaching.

The Art of Biblical Narrative by Robert Alter
Finished 7/21/12

When I was a freshman in high school, my English teacher quipped that Edith Hamilton was the goddess of Greek mythology. If every pantheon has a scholar that is the god of it, then Robert Alter is the God of the Hebrew Bible. After creating and popularizing literary approaches to the Bible in this book and The Art of Biblical Poetry, he began his brilliant translations of the Torah, Psalms, Wisdom books, and the one my group read is doing now, The David Story.

Alter's main point in this careful polemic is that historical-critical scholarship, which dominated biblical scholarship in most of the twentieth century, is unimaginative. It places too much emphasis on the fragmented nature of the Biblical texts, and in doing so overlooks the nuances of language and story that unify the tomes. When it sees two different writing styles, it automatically assumes that there are multiple sources at work, rather than that one author or authorial school intentionally changed voices. The closest it ever got to literary criticism, form criticism, only created categories to place different texts in, without exploring the dynamics of how the author employed or refused to employ the genre. By assuming that the text is fragmentary and often not well-wrought, it denigrates the text.

Alter seeks to restore the genius of the writers of the Hebrew Bible not from an a priori religious framework of inspiration, but by close readings of pericopes demonstrating the subtleties of the Biblical tales that previous scholarship, done by historians and archaeologists rather than literary critics, did not pick up on. Alter situates his analysis of the literary techniques and forms of the Hebrew Bible in the overarching theological problematic of the monotheistic revolution: how do God and man interact? The Bible everywhere explores the tension between God's perfect plan and man's uncertain agency, between God's certain knowledge and man's chaotic uncertainty, between the seeming contradiction of a Godly determinism and the basic human impulse to free will. The Bible explores this not just in its content, but in its use of narrative style, dialogue, repetition, and type-scenes.

In chapter two, Alter begins his scrutiny of narrative by looking at the difference between ancient polytheistic myth and the Bible. The difference is that the pagan world of myth had a stable closure, and stories were tied to orality, to repetition, to ritual. Hebrew narrative has an indeterminacy to it, as the stories are ambiguous, leave things unsaid, and leave the reader with multiple meanings available. (This underdetermined nature of Biblical narrative was likely what led to later midrashic traditions.) He compares the creation narrative of J starting in Genesis 2:4 with the Enuma Elish, and finds that humanity in Genesis has a "morally problematic interiority," made in the image of God but also autonomous, that is not in the Babylonian creation myth. This indeterminacy and element of the chaotic humanness (which the reader always lives in) plays out in the Bible's depiction of history, which oscillates between God's hand being clearly at work (Esther) and human drama taking the spotlight (Deueteronomistic history), with no book being completely at one extreme or the other. The Hebrews were writing neither history nor fiction, but "fictionalized history" with conscious artistic intent. This fiction written in order to explore history plays out most fully in the David saga, which Alter compares to Shakespeare's fictionalized versions of English history. In its deep characterization and portrayal of the human, Alter sees in the Bible a possible birth of fiction.

The third chapter moves onto type-scenes, archetypal repetitions of events that formed part of the unspoken artistic conventions of Biblical narrative. Since we don't know of any ancient Hebrew literary theory, we can only guess what these conventions might be. These type-scenes, such as the hero's betrothal played out in Moses, Jacob, and Samson, are consciously varied to let the reader infer aspects of the particular hero of that story. For example, whereas Moses' betrothal begins with him defending helpless women and properly meeting the bride's father, Samson bluntly desires a foreign woman and simply demands his parents secure her. Moses' near-perfect morality contrasts with Samson's hot-headed and cocky swag, both here and everywhere else in their stories. These repeated type-scenes capture the cyclical rhythm of God's activity in history - the saga of human life, of following and forgetting God, of birth and death.

In chapter four, Alter makes a fascinating assertion about Biblical narration: it is scant. The reader learns far more about characters through dialogue and reported action than through an omniscient narrator's epithetic labeling. This is unique to the Bible; Homer has long monologue rather than dialogue. By focusing the reader on dialogue, the emphasis becomes characters' reactions to events rather than the events themselves. And not knowing about a character's interior motives leaves us wondering about them, leaves us in the human's-eye view of uncertainty rather than the God's-eye view of omniscience about the character. This emphasis on the spoken word even evokes the theology that as God creates and reveals with words, so God-imaged humanity reveals and creates with words. The reader of Biblical narrative is advised to look closely at the dialogue. Does a character speak in lofty near-verse or in brief, slangy utterances? When does the narrator transition between his voice and the dialogue, what is being emphasized in doing so? The narrator's hands-off treatment, prefiguring modern novels, lets human agency express itself in the midst of a God-driven world.

But not only are type-scenes repeated. Repetition moves up a scale, from words, motifs, themes, and sequences of actions, up to type-scenes. As Biblical narrative moves on, it adds new connotations and meanings to repeated units, as they evoke their past instantiations. Just as God's orderly pattern of words created an orderly universe, so God's word is repeated and made sense of in the context of Biblical narrative. For example, the motif of water repeats in Moses' life, from the water he was put in at birth to the water he draws from the stone in the desert. Elsewhere in the Bible, water will evoke Moses and how water both let them escape from Egypt and prevented them from entering Canaan. Not only is repetition key in the Bible, but so is lack of repetition - say a type-scene of a hero is omitted from one hero's story - or difference from the usual way of repeating a unit. Dialogues can be repeated by characters saying the same words but with different intentions. As Alter says, the Biblical narratives are not merely conveying information, they are using language - the vehicle of the story - as an intrinsic part of what is being narrated.

Despite the fact that little explicit characterization is done in the Bible (remember: dialogue-focused), characters still seem fully fleshed out. How? Alter explores this in the sixth chapter. Though the Biblical narrator is almost always omniscient, we only see glimpses of this, and are instead given information about a character indirectly through actions and words. Looking at when a narrator chooses to reveal their knowledge can tell us a lot about the content. For example, when David is coming to power, we only hear his public speeches and actions. Yet the narrator reveals Saul's internal motives and crazed thoughts. Only later in the David saga do we see the complex man behind the public image. This reticence to share leaves the reader both wondering about the characters (remember: human's-eye view) and allows the characters to develop. There are no Homeric epithets in the Bible.

Alter then returns to the historical-critical scholars for the seventh chapter, on "composite artistry." What is a "book" in the Bible? Can any one book be set apart from the others, or are the boundaries too porous? Is any book unified, or is it a patchwork of different authors? In what I consider the most brilliant chapter of the book, Alter finds a middle road: yes, there are differing voices and styles in the Bible, and there is a multiplicity. But the final redactors also used literary genius in bringing these different accounts together. For example, the surface contradiction between the Priestly creation's simultanous creation of man and woman and the Yahwist's creation of woman from man are in fact complementary. The Yahwist perspective coming from sexism paints women as inferior, as helpers for the men who do the important things in society. The Priestly account recognizes that women are mens' equal in morality, in strength, in intelligence. Together these provide two contrasting and complementary perspectives that can both be found elsewhere in the Bible. Same with the tension between P's rhymic, orderly, rational creation emphasizing God and J's chaotic creation emphasizing man and his free will. What seems like a contradiction - or elsewhere in the Bible, seems like sloppy editing - is only so due to the reader's inability to read literary nuances. Narrative structure allows for these "montage of views arranged in sequence" concerning God's agency vs. humanity's, the universe's chaos and its order, and the messy human drama of history and God's divine plan. Literature is paradoxical as is human life.

Last but not least, Alter examines how Biblical narrative is a form of knowledge. It reveals a fund of experience, of human life, that is both the same and wildly different from the 21st-century North American reader's. The narrator only lets us learn what he wants us to learn. The narrator's relation to the reader is like God's relation to humanity - only allowing the recipient to have some knowledge, but also forcing them to think things out for themselves. Alter looks at the scenes where Joseph re-encounters his brothers, showing his Joseph's motives are both clear and unclear. The reader, putting herself in this story and all the others of the Bible, begins to see how to relate to God in her human uncertainty and chaos. The Bible's artistry, first seen as a rejection of a purely didactic purpose, turns out to have theological import.

This multiplicity of meanings, this ongoing human saga, is what attracts me to the Bible. The Hebrew Bible far more than the New Testament contains a complete portrait of a human society, of people experiencing human dramas, of the mundane aspects of life apart from the specifically religious. Alter's book hit me like dynamite opening new caves to explore in my ongoing quest to dive into sacred texts. His ability to convey literary nuances while not expecting the reader to know Hebrew is even more amazing. My only complaint is that the book is a bit dated. The second edition only updated a few things here and there, and did not take into account all the scholarship in literary criticism and the Bible that has happened in the thirty years since Alter published his book. Still, this book is worth its weight in gold, and belongs on every literature lover's shelf.

Rating: 5/5

You should post that on the book's page. Thank you for it.

Robert

I did! With a five star rating. I'm sorry if these reviews seem very long but I do them in large part so I remember the book well.

God, Language, and Scripture: Reading the Bible in the Light of General Linguistics by Moises Silva
Finished 7/22/12

I discovered Silva's work via a recommendations in the backs of Joel Hoffman's books. Like Hoffman, Silva is a linguist, but unlike Hoffman he is a Christian whose interest extends to both Testaments. Silva, an evangelical scholar, provides an overview of both linguistics in general and that of Biblical Hebrew and Greek in particular.

Silva begins with a look at how language is portrayed in the Bible. Language is a double-edged sword: it is both how God created the universe and how humans are divided in their multitude of Babels. In the New Testament, Jesus is the Incarnate Word, the Logos of God, but words of insult and scandal also divide early Christian communities, as shown in the epistles. Silva points out that language, as part of humanity's image of God, is a religious act. Using language well is a development of one of humanity's greatest potentials. Language is a Christian act. A bit cheesy, and a bit brief, but then again he's not a theologian.

Linguistics, for Silva, is a synchronic descriptive discipline. That is, it is not historical, and it is not prescriptive. Languages are often studied under the humanities, but linguistics is mainly a behavioral science. Despite historical change of languages not being the main focus of linguistics, it is useful to know that Greek comes from the Indo-European or Indo-Aryan language family. It is cousins with the Romantic and Germanic languages, and even related to Sanskrit. But Hebrew is from the Semitic family, closely related to Canaanite and Aramaic and more distantly to Arabic. While we often think that Jews spoke and used Hebrew at all times in the ancient world, in fact many Jews spoke Aramaic, which has similar sounds and many cognates with Hebrew. Hebrew likely developed as a dialect of Canaanite, and was restricted to Jews, whereas Aramaic was a lingua franca of the ancient Near East.

Unlike Hebrew, we know many ancient dialects of Greek. But the varieties of Aeolic, Doric, Ionic, and Attic Greek were subsumed by the latter when Alexander the Great established his empire in the fourth century BCE. Attic Greek's becoming a koine, or common, language required much simplification, which intellectuals decried in their effort to keep it pure and literary. Their campaign to make a "high culture" Koine never made it to the New Testament, which even in its most eloquent writings does not display the "high Attic" style. Knowing that the Greek language was undergoing drastic change during the time of the New Testament makes me wonder how visible that is in its writings. Is the Greek of the early Pauline letters (50s CE) that different from that of Revelation (early 100s CE)? How much is that due to the indivudual authors' differences? How could a translator capture those nuances, replicating how the NT's style of Greek would have sounded to a Greek in the first century? Ironically, what English KJV readers think of as high, archaic language - "the King's Speech" - was actually colloquial and common Greek.

Silva's information on the many varieties of Greee contrasts with the scant evidence of the history of Hebrew in Hoffman's In the Beginning: A Short History of the Hebrew Language. There could have been many different dialects of Hebrew spoken by ancient Jews, many different forms of both high and low Hebrew. But we have a plethora of ancient Greek writing samples compared to Hebrew. Since our manuscripts of the Masoretic text only date to c. 1000 CE, we can't know how many different regional writing styles or dialects were standardized by a milennium or more of scribal copying. All we have from the ancient world are the Dead Sea Scrolls and a handful of inscriptions. It's tantalizing to think what we have lost and may never find.

The meat of Silva's book is in his descriptions of the grammar of Greek and Hebrew. Some points:
-- The main difficulty in learning these languages is that unlike English, they are highly inflected. Even more in Greek than in Hebrew, grammar is expressed by changing words, adding prefixes and suffixes, in Hebrew's case also by changing vowels. English is more word order-based. While nouns inflect in Greek by grammatical function (five cases!), in Hebrew they only do so by gender and number.
-- Greek, like German, easily makes new words by combining nouns. This makes Greek etymology often very transparent, even though finding the meaning of a word through etymology is usually very risky.
-- Hebrew's perfect-imperfect system often leaves novice learners mystified. After all, if Hebrew can't express the present tense, doesn't this have some deep mystical impact on the way ancient Israel ontologized the world? But in fact, it is only a grammatical convention, and Hebrew can use participles or context to express the present tense quite easily.

I did encounter something new in Silva's section on discourse analysis. What is a sentence? How do we know something is a paragraph? This seems abstract, but remember that often the verse and paragraph distinctions in both Old and New Testament are arbitrary and not in the original manuscripts. How can the meaning of a text change if the paragraphs are restructured? Silva also describes the debates between dyanmic and formal translation proponents. (Another reason to learn the original.)

Like Hoffman, Silva stresses that context is really the only way one can find out what a word means. Textbook definitions such as "levav = heart" fail to capture the nuances of how context can change the meaning of a word. This is especially true of prepositions, which can have over a dozen meanings. Even verb forms have this problem, as a student may have only learned the 1-2 major meanings of a verb form, leaving them confused when a more obscure meaning is intended. Overall, the map is not the territory, and the simplistic definitions and grammatical explanations required to teach these languages must eventually be discarded.

Silva's book was a bit of a let-down after reading Alter. But I will also give Silva the benefit of the doubt, as this was not intended to be an original scholarly work like Alter's but more of a layperson's overview. Silva has a more technical work, Biblical Words and Their Meaning: An Introduction to Lexical Semantics, that I hope to get to someday. But alas, I first must learn Greek. Overall, Silva's is a useful, if not always clear and pointed, introduction to some highly technical issues for the average churchgoer who has no need to wade through linguistics textbooks. But for this reader, it was just too facile.

Rating: 3/5

Your informative review of The Art of Biblical Narrative makes me want to do two things: 1)crack my Bible open and start reading and 2)order Alter's book. I particularly like what you say: "The narrator's relation to the reader is like God's relation to humanity - only allowing the recipient to have some knowledge, but also forcing them to think things out for themselves." Great stuff.

> 74

Thank you! There are some LT groups - richardbsmith manages a nice one called Gospel Talk. Also in Club Read I am involved in a group read of the Hebrew Bible. We're just starting Samuel and are using Alter's translation, The David Story.

Catching up and enjoying your reviews. Re-reading your review of The Art of Biblical Narrative...it is simply spectacular. I've copied out several of your lines and saved them for a personal reference. I'll re-post only one line here: that we readers are left "in the human's-eye view of uncertainty rather than the God's-eye view of omniscience about the character." For all it's claims of godly perfection, and others' claims of this, the books leave any somewhat careful reader in a complex state of uncertainty - whether about the characters or really any intended meanings. It's an echo of human contradiction and complexity.

(PS - you may (or may not) want to unbold your review of Wisdom Energy on the book page)

> 76

Ditto that. Thankfully Alter has at least two other books about the Bible. I'm wondering if there is an Alter alter ego for the New Testament.

The Literary Guide to the Bible covers NT, but I haven't read ahead, so don't know how well it's done. It's a place to start, anyway.

I've read a few of them. My impression of the volume is that it's rather piecemeal. I'd like someone who can bring together the whole New Testament. I do know of a few scholars reading the NT as Literature - Frank Kermode and James Resseguie come to mind. There is also Kyle Keefer's short New Testament as Literature: A Very Short Introduction.

Household Stories by the Brothers Grimm, by Jacob Grimm and Wilhelm Grimm
Finished 7/28/12

I should preface this review by noting that I'm reading this book as part of the Coursera free online course in "Fantasy and Science Fiction: The Human Mind, Our Modern World." The course is divided into ten units:

I. Household Stories by the Brothers Grimm
II. Alice's Adventures in Wonderland and Through the Looking-Glass by Lewis Carroll
III. Dracula by Bram Stoker
IV. Frankenstein by Mary Shelley
V. "The Birthmark," "Rappaccini's Daughter," "Dr. Heidegger's Experiment," and "The Artist of the Beautiful", by Nathaniel Hawthorne and "The Fall of the House of Usher," "The Tell-Tale Heart," "The Black Cat," "The Oval Portrait," "The Facts in the Case of M. Valdemar," "The Bells," "The Raven," and "Annabel Lee" by Edgar Allan Poe
VI. The Island of Doctor Moreau, The Invisible Man, "The Country of the Blind," and "The Star" by H.G. Wells
VII. A Princess of Mars by Edgar Rice Burroughs and Herland by Charlotte Perkins Gilman
VIII. The Martian Chronicles by Ray Bradbury
IX. The Left Hand of Darkness by Ursula K. LeGuin
X. Little Brother by Cory Doctorow

Since I'll be on retreat I'm going to miss the Lewis Carroll reading. I've read Alice before so I'll survive missing it. This will be a good way to ensure I get no break before my university starts September 17.

Grimms' "Household Stories" (not fairy tales) are a macabre, fun selection of stories about people trying to get what they want. It was hard to keep track of all the different stories, and I only read about half. But they have very un-Disney versions of such stories as Hansel and Grethel and Cinderella (aka "Ashenputten"). Overall a fun and easy read.

The short response paper I wrote for the class:

Scheming is a recurring theme in the Grimms' tales. One or more characters scheme to get something they want. The scheme is where the supernatural, unusual, or fantastic element comes in - something that does not reflect the reader's mundane reality. Aschenputten's scheme to go to the fair relies on her the supernatural intervention of birds. The witch's scheme to eat Hansel and Grethel relies on her fantastic house. The anomalous element of reality that various characters manipulate or utilize is both dangerous and advantageous. The witch's oven is both her means of support and her deathbed. The white snake that the king's servant eats is both dangerously prohibited and life-saving ("The White Snake").

The scheme, which relies on pulling together very specific elements, either fails or succeeds. The bird who schemes to make less work for himself ends up causing death ("The Mouse, the Bird, and the Sausage"). The tailor who schemes to enjoy the reputation of a valorous warrior succeeds, not through strength but luck and craftiness ("The Gallant Tailor"). The cock and hen who want free transportation and shelter succeed because they utilize the pin, needle, and duck in just the right way ("The Vagabonds"). For successful characters, their agency and luck makes things come together in a puzzle-like way so their scheme succeeds. For others, such as stepmothers, their own flaws or bad luck cause their demise.

These stories stay in our minds because of our fascination with the unusual or anomalous and how we are to live in the context of, to make sense of, a radically different world. These anomalies can be technological or fantastic. They can also be supernatural, which not only the Grimm brothers deal with but religion also. This simultaneous empowerment, fear, and danger is not only in Grimm, but also in Otto's "mysterium tremendum" and in religious rituals such as shamanic vision-quests. The Grimms' tales are only one part of this fabric of relation to the anomalous.

===========

As I mentioned before, this is my last post before my retreat. I will be back August 9!

That is quite a conventional list of books for the Fantasy and Science fiction course

Have a good retreat.

Yes, enjoy your retreat!

80 - I've looked at doing the Coursera classes before, and that one in particular. I'll be interested to hear your thoughts on it.

There's an LT discussion group for the Fantasy/Sci-fi course:

http://www.librarything.com/topic/140136#3512814

Thanks!

News to everyone: I am now home from Nepal, back to my ordinary life. Or at least trying to be. I've got three books done so far in August to write about, which I will not do in order.

The Life of Milarepa by Tsangnyon Heruka
Finished 8/13/12

The Life of Milarepa follows the life of a Tibetan saint, as narrated by himself. Milarepa, who lived in the eleventh and twelfth centuries, came from a wealthy family and seemed destined for a comfortable life. But as a young boy his dad died, and his aunt and uncle who were the custodians of his to-be-inherited wealth stole it from him, leaving his mom and sister in poverty and sorrow. So he did what any disgruntled family member would do: he learned the arts of black magic and killed 35 people at his cousin's wedding party, then sent a hailstorm onto the entire region the day before harvest.

Milarepa's contrite shame led to his leaving his black magic teacher and seeking the dharma. Marpa, his teacher, was one of the most famous scholars of his day, having brought back many Buddhist texts from India as part of the eleventh-century "Tibetan Renaissance." After abusing Milarepa and refusing to teach him dharma - to purge his bad karma - Marpa trains Milarepa into his best disciple, the one who would attain liberation in one lifetime alone. This highly frank book, in which Milarepa spares no details about his shameful youth and his anger at Marpa for withholding the dharma, is one of the classic hagiographies of Tibetan Buddhism. As the introduction notes, in many ways Milarepa's story parallels the Buddha's. This makes sense, as in Vajrayana it is said that one's lama is like the Buddha - or even is the Buddha - for his students. Overall an interesting read, filled with the rich Tantric symbolism and ritual of Tibet.

Dracula by Bram Stoker
Finished 8/12/12

Dracula is one of the books I'm reading for the Coursera fantasy and sci-fi class. I tend to be a big wimp who doesn't like horror books and movies. But I could not put down Stoker's philosophically-charged novel. And though Eric Rabkin points out in the online lecture that vampire stories are in many cultures, Dracula is the definitive vampire depiction in English literature. Stoker's proteges - perhaps imitators - have a lot to owe him, from Anne Rice to Stephanie Meyer.

Stoker's novel, written by an Irishman 1897, is part of the Romantic genre of Gothic literature. Gothic literature conjured up the myth and superstition of "that Romish religion," the medieval Catholicism whose abandoned abbeys and cathedrals dotted the English landscape in geography and imagination. Appropriately, Stoker plays with the themes of reason and superstition in his novel. His cast of educated characters who understand the rational nuances of medicine, psychiatry, and law are confronted with a beast - a problem - that these cannot destroy. At the start of the novel, Jonathan Harker is annoyed by what he sees as the superstition of the peasants who fear Count Dracula. The irony is that these characters must use the ancient superstition and folklore revealing Dracula's habits and weaknesses (garlic and crucifixes!) in a highly rational way, deducing plans of attack and likely places to find the Count. I see here a critique of science, which tends to look down on folk superstition and disprove it rather than accept it as credible evidence.

One of the philosophical ingredients of science is empiricism, a philosophical doctrine stating that knowledge comes only from the senses. But Stoker's characters are often in other states of consciousness. In sleep they have nightmares of a vampire which seem to be real. Upon waking they find they have funny bites on their neck. Mina Harker, in a trance, partakes of the blood the vampire and begins to share his essence. This horrifying evil becomes a boon when she realizes that in hypnosis she can access the Count's mind and tell others the "hunting party" his whereabouts. Whereas empirical science assumes that we are in control of our senses and our minds do not deceive us, Stoker's characters have a hard time telling reality from altered states of mind, and even find valuable information in those non-ordinary states. Here we have the Enlightenment rationality contrasted with the psychological introspection of the Romantics, the era that birthed Freud.

The book's epistolary format led me to trust the narrators, as I saw the world only through their eyes and had no reason to doubt them. But at the end of the novel, Jonathan Harker (in his diary) laments that the only evidence they had of the whole affair was written testimony. After all, who would accept such fantastic claims on the basis of eyewitnesses alone? I, the reader, who believed the credibility of the story all the way along, realized then that if I ran into someone on the street who told me of these things, I would think they were a little off. I - and the science-obsessed culture I am a part of - am wary of claims of the paranormal, the parapsychological, of occult physical phenomena that make no sense by current scientific theories. How much truth or reality is excluded by the scientific need for documentation, verification, and replication? How many "crackpots" have in fact had real experiences? Stoker's novel raises these questions by using the letters of sane, credible, and educated characters to reveal strange things beyond belief, beyond ordinary states of mind, drawing on ancient "ignorant" superstition. What does science as a knowledge system unjustly exclude?

Overall, a great read.

The Intellectual Life: Its Spirit, Conditions, Methods, by A. G. Sertillanges, O.P.
Finished early August 2012

I first encountered Sertillanges' 1921 book of pithy advice in 2009, when reading it inspired me and changed my entire approach to the intellectual vocation. So while on my meditation retreat, I decided this would be a good re-read before starting university. I enjoyed it so much that I have ordered a copy in the original language for a friend studying French.

Rather than a summary, I composed a prayer for use before and after study, made up of instructions in this book I found most pithy and memorable. Of course this is only a draft which will evolve as I use it.

Prayer to Truth.

Lord,
As I begin my study, remind me to always be a conscientious workman.
May I only be satisfied by the depths of the truth, not by little gems and shallow understanding.
May I find the perseverance to dive into one field, but never lose an eye to the unity of Truth in you.
May I have a heart afire for your son Jesus Christ, not a crammed head for my ego.

God,
Purify me morally so I may be open to your truth in love and charity.
Cleanse my mind so that it focuses on you in solitude and silence, but not in rejection of all your sons and daughters.
Remind me of my ignorance, that I am always a child to you and to the Truth beyond all human understanding.
Fill me with a love and respect for my study, a building-up for your Kingdom rather than a cutting criticism for my ego.
Show me when I am losing humility, when I gaze at my ideas too impressed by my ingenuity to tear them down and see truth afresh.
Never let me forget the depth of the universe, of children, of nature, of all things in Your glorious creation.

In waking and sleeping, study and socializing, in my mind and body, in my thoughts and actions,
May I be a thinker at all times, as I strive to be a Christian at all times.
May I work before the Cross, as I live before the Cross.
May my mind only serve to make me a broad and loving person.
Guide my work with vision at the outset, with perseverance in the middle, and with dedication to your people at the end.
Blessed be you, O Lord, in all the ways you shine in the world.
In the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
Amen.

Interesting remarks on Dracula, but you draw to me confusing conclusions:

Stoker's novel raises these questions by using the letters of sane, credible, and educated characters to reveal strange things beyond belief, beyond ordinary states of mind, drawing on ancient "ignorant" superstition.

Except... those "strange things beyond belief" in Stoker's book, count Dracula and his vampiric powers namely--don't exist. (Orrr... *cue theremin music* do they?!?! :))

What does science as a knowledge system unjustly exclude?

What indeed? And, if we can't determine THAT, how does one begin to claim that THAT is "unjustly" excluded?

But I'd argue the problem is much simpler (at least, from a scientific point of view)--what cannot be probed by any scientific means at our disposal is thereby "excluded" from scientific worldview. If someone claims that, for instance, Stoker has determined vampires exist, however strange and "beyond belief" they may be, science says "okay, show 'em". If the next claim is that these strange beings aren't amenable to being "shown" to science, science then shrugs and declares such claims outside its purview.

> 89

You raise good points, Lola.

This reminds me of a conversation I had at the American Psychological Association two years back, with a woman whose passion was what William James called "psychical research." One of the main problems with supposed clairvoyance or encounters with ghosts and other "non-ordinary beings" is that they seem to be scattered accounts of anomalous happenings. Is this because they are really the mental fabrications of confused individuals, or because science (with its insistence on replication and publically observable phenomena) is not equipped to understand anomalous occurrences? She opted for the latter, and felt that scientific (esp. psychological) methodology would have to change to study the paranormal.

For my part, I find the conversation more interesting than the entrenched answers on either side. It's possible these things happen, but usually when I speak with someone who has claimed its occurrence in their life I am more interested in how they thought and felt about the experience, and how it affected them, than in determining veracity. But that doesn't discount the task of people like James Randi.

A Time to Keep Silence by Patrick Leigh Fermor
Finished 8/16/12

I picked this up in NYC's Westside Books on my layover Monday. Fermor, a British travel writer, spent some time in French monasteries during the 1940's for a period of sojourn and writing. This short book describes Fermor's descent into the silence of the Benedictine and more-arduous Cistercian monasteries he lived in.

This was a good book to read coming out of retreat. Fermor at first feels the strict schedule and silence of the Benedictines are confining, gets furious at it, and wants to run away. Silence in community is tough, as I found on my not-so-silent retreat! Yet Fermor then finds it liberating, and notices that the Benedictine monks, at first so prohibiting and hooded, were a jovial, luminous, and well-read bunch. Somehow without speaking they had a closer bond than the secular world of idle chatter.

Despite being so used to the Benedictine silence that returning to the outside world was painful, Fermor balks at the almost pathological strictness of the Cistercians. He describes their life as one long atonement, with almost the entire day taken up by arduous farm labor and hours of communal prayer. How could such an order exist? Are they repressing deep, deviant desires or truly integrated in their asceticism? Fermor writes:

"The psychological conundrum might be solved by an encounter of the champions of either side. A great mandarin of psychoanalysis should enter the arena with a cardinal expert in theology, dialectics, and mysticism, who had graduated to the Sacred College from fifty years in a Cistercian monastery. Alas, the terms of reference of the antagonists would be so different irreconcilable, so incapable of engaging, that the match might turn into a double exhibition of shadow-boxing: the psycho-analyst aiming murderous strokes with the repression of the libido, followed through by the Id, while the cardinal parried with the Action of Grace and the Paraclete, and drove his advantage home with Pseudo-Dionysios the Araeopagite; leaving the opponents panting, unharming and unharmed, and crowd and umpire more bewildered than before." (71)

There is much truth in this, and Fermor admits that he is not capable of understanding, and therefore judging, the Cistercian penances. He admits he would never have the capability to join it himself. While I wished for more personal reflections on the life of the monastery, Fermor gives enough to have interest. His reluctance to speak of his own religious views, preferring instead to give personal reflections on silence and contempation rather than the theology behind it, gives the book a broader appeal. In fact I plan to give this to a nonreligious uncle when finished. Not everyone's cup of tea, but a good short read.

Welcome back! I enjoyed reading your review of Dracula. It's what I'll start reading in the next few days.

leaving the opponents panting, unharming and unharmed surely it does not get better than that.

I have read and enjoyed a couple of Patrick Leigh Fermour's travel books. I didn't know about his time in French monasteries - but then I am not surprised.

Interesting review of Bram Stoker's Dracula.

Hope your prayer helps you with your studies.

What does O.P. stand for?

Robert

scientific (esp. psychological) methodology would have to change to study the paranormal.

And lose the name of science, which is, paradoxically, exactly what these people hanker after.

Have you seen any levitating monks in Nepal, by the way? I had that image from a Tintin comic seared in my mind since childhood.

#91

I read that last year, and IIRC, I too felt a bit deceived by Fermor's reticence on religion--where better than in a monastery to face questions of faith?--but he must have had his reasons for not disclosing his opinions. For a very different book, in that regard, you may be interested in Huysmans' En route, a fictionalised account of his conversion to Catholicism, including experiences as a lay brother in several monasteries, including Solesmes--which Fermor visited too.

Monastery retreats have become quite the thing since the 1940s. I've a Buddhist friend in New Orleans who stays with some nuns whenever she feels "down", and a cousin--not only Jewish, but a member of some neo-Gnostic sect--who's been shacking up with Benedictines three months every year for almost 25 years. He's an acoustic engineer in Milan by trade, when I asked him what he likes best about the monastery, answer came super-quick: "the silence, the silence!"

> 94

O.P. = Order of Preachers, or in other words Sertillanges was a Dominican priest.

> 95

I loved Tintin! But I never remembered the one about Tibet. These kinds of extraordinary abilities - levitation, clairvoyance, raising one's body temperature - are known as signs of an advanced practice in various forms of Tibetan Buddhism. My understanding is that these are not focused on as ends in themselves, as the true fruits of practice are the development of wisdom and compassion leading to enlightenment. But they can be signs to others - say, potential students - of the extent of a lama's liberation.

One of my fellow students in the Buddhist Studies course found these extraordinary powers quite amazing, and would rave on about how these lamas could work magic. Personally I think they are distractions, irrelevant to the real difficult everyday work of spiritual growth. It's the same with Uri Geller and other TV psychics - even if it is true, so what if he can bend a spoon? That's not really important....

But I never saw any of these abilities firsthand.

I can see why your Buddhist and Jewish friends go to the Benedictines. Buddhism monasticism hasn't exactly caught on in the States, and I don't even know of any extant Jewish monastic communities. One great thing about being Catholic: we have it all, baby!

Two thousand years of capital accumulation and no property tax! No wonder the end of the world keeps getting postponed.

A Tree Grows in Brooklyn by Betty Smith
Finished 8/19/12

After noticing that only 3/70 of the books I've read this year were by women (unintentional!) I decided it was time to balance that out. Thankfully the 75 Books Challenge 2012 group decided to read ATGIB. This book is not only written by a woman, but centers around women. The main character, Francie, grows from an introverted bookworm to an intelligent women interested in romance and college. The book follows her coming of age as her family changes for the better and for the worse. (I'm not putting any spoilers in.)

One thing I liked about this novel was Francie's sense of identity. By the end of the book, she knows who she is, even as everything about her is changing. The end of the novel leaves her on a transition point, where she has time to be nostalgic about life. This was the most touching part - it reminded me of all the changes and transitions in my life, which unlike Francie's were mostly sudden, unexpected, and with little time for nostalgic goodbyes. My other favorite parts were Francie's ruminations on writing and what it means to tell the truth, which seemed to come straight from the author's mouth. Smith has written a gem of a book that seems downright autobiographical. I'm sad to see it go.

Group read thread (there's still time!): www.librarything.com/topic/140144

Now you should read Hubert Selby's Last Exit to Brooklyn. It is loving, but I must caution you that it is also very raw.

Robert

Frankenstein, Or the Modern Prometheus by Mary Shelley
Finished 8/20/12

Frankenstein rounds out the fourth week of my Coursera material. This book was slow to get into, but a fun read. It lacked the suspense of Dracula but had some highly eloquent, philosophical speeches, ironically given by the ugly monster.

Like Dracula, Frankenstein creates a world of reversals. The monster is ugly on the outside, but compassionate and virtuous on the inside. Frankenstein is handsome on the outside, but unempathetic and cruel on the inside. This hints at the reversals in this book in which humanity's reason is suggested to not be a God-given, noble side of us, but the basis for a sick desire for power and conquest showing that humanity should not play with life, that we can not be God.

In Western culture, especially during the Enlightenment, reason is often considered the highest part of humanity. Reason - through science - will deliver us from suffering through inventions such as vaccines, and is what separates us from animals and makes us God-like. But in this book, Frankenstein's creation is his unvirtuous, sick desire for power, for knowledge no human should have. The ugliness of his use of reason, and his character in general, is symbolized by the ugliness of the monster he creates. He is the Jungian shadow of Frankenstein's aspirations to enlightened knowledge, which is why the monster repulses him so much.

But Shelley's exposure of Frankenstein's character is also a critique of science in its revealing of the dark side of human nature. Science here does not cure anyone or make anyone happy. Instead of glorifying Frankenstein as the arbiter of a new scientific breakthrough, the creation of the monster drives him to shame, isolation, and insanity. The religious parallels are clear: unlike God, Frankenstein doesn't know how to treat his creation. He can't make it happy, as he does not care for it. He hates it. He refuses to empathize with it. This creator is contrasted to the Christian Creator, who unlike Frankenstein is both loving and wise enough to know how to care for his creation. So while the monster is referred to as fallen man, in fact it is Frankenstein. Frakenstein is fallen man because he is too clueless and unloving to be God. The presence of the monster reminds Frakenstein - and the reader - of the limits of humanity, of our inability to be God, of the sicknesses that our reason can produce. These are things we often don't wish to hear about ourselves, as we believe we are virtuous and capable of the highest rationality. Hence the monster being ugly, and hence the discomfort and fascination the Frankenstein story brings out in readers.

Overall, worth reading. Also - as a footnote, a cursory look at IMDB reveals there are at least 4 movie adaptations of this book, and many other spinoffs and "what-ifs", including one due out 2013. This is a good hint at how much this story sticks in the imagination!

Excellent review and insights into Frankenstein! I read it years ago as required reading for a class in English Literature and I remember how surprised I was that the Frankenstein monster of our popular culture has so little to do with the Frankenstein monster in the novel. I am reading Dracula now and I agree with you about Dracula being more suspenseful.

Catching up here. Your review of Dracula is quite different from any other review I've read, and quite interesting. I'm intrigued by Patrick Leigh Fermor, another review that stands out. But enjoyed them all.

Thank you Dan and Avidmom!

If you ever have the opportunity to watch The National Theatre Live's Frankenstein in either version, I suggest that you do. I've seen it in both, and it held my attention. It will inform your reading.

Robert

Robert -

Danny Boyle's Millions is one of my favorite movies, so I will gladly watch anything he directs!

Good review of Frankenstein, or the Modern Prometheus which raises some interesting questions. Many people today would not equate searching for the secret of life as being God-like and so a novel like Frankenstein is one of those that must be placed in the context of the times in which it was written.

To me searching for the creation of life is God-like. :)

A Life of Jesus by Shusaku Endo
Finished 8/23/12

Shusaku Endo's story-like book on Jesus is not a work of historical scholarship. Nor is it a work toeing the line of orthodoxy for the sake of the comfortably religious. Endo wrote his life of Jesus for the Japanese. His work emphasizes those aspects of Jesus that make the most sense for that culture.

So Endo discusses neither atonement theology nor Hebraic prophecy. He barely touches on Jesus' divinity. In Endo's portrait, incomplete as are all human portraits of this enigmatic figure, Jesus was a peasant who tried to teach the message of God's love in a world where people only wanted miracle-workers or a Messiah who would fix their earthly problems. Endo's Jesus was a very human being who increasingly realized his bumbling, cowardly disciples did not understand him. Endo's Jesus seems almost bodhisattva-like in his acute awareness of others' subtle sufferings. Endo's God is not a strong father on a throne, but a maternal lover who suffers with humans to show her understanding and love. Endo's God, and Endo's Jesus, reveals His true meaning only in the weakness and vulnerability of the Passion.

But Endo's best insights come not when talking about Jesus alone, but about his relations with John the Baptist, with Peter, Judas, and the other disciples, and with the Roman and Jewish authorities who condemned him. For example, Endo speculates that the temptation in the desert recorded in the Gospels may have been an encounter with an Essence proselyte. Jesus would have seen in the proselyte a message of repentance and the wrath of God, but nothing about the love of God. The crowds who follow Jesus are both his popularity and his downfall, as their fickle judgments first adore him as a miracle-worker, eschew him after the Sermon on the Mount, begin to love him again as they project their Messianic fantasies on him, and ultimately reject and betray him when he preaches at the Last Supper that he will die. Judas was a man who, long before the other disciples, realized that Jesus was not the Messiah. Judas' mixed hatred and love for both himself and Jesus drive him to first betray his teacher, then to repent of that act and become saved through his understanding of Jesus' suffering.

This book is as much a life of Jesus as a psychology of the disciples. How did these cowardly men, who not only ran away from their master in his suffering but disavowed him, become courageous apostles and martyrs? Endo looks at other young, small religious movements of the time and can see no historical reason why they died and Christianity survived. Endo speculates that perhaps the Resurrection made them finally understand all of Jesus' talk about God's love.

Just as Jesus was misunderstood in his life, so he is now. I enjoyed Endo's attempt to make sense of Jesus in one cultural idiom. And while it's clear this book isn't the last word on Jesus, Endo writes that he could well write another book on this divine prophet's life.

"That's the whole life of Jesus. It stands out clean and simple, like a single Chinese ideograph brushed on a blank sheet of paper. It was so clean and simple that no one could make sense of it, and no one could produce its like." (173)

Enjoyed your review of Endo's A Life of Jesus.

How very different from Giovanni Papini's fruity and clamorous Storia di Cristo. Have you read Renan? (Vie de Jésus) I like Bulgakov's portrayal in Master and Margarita the best.

Endo's Silence is on my reading list; I might add A Life of Jesus to that as well. The quote there at the end reminded me of the Bible verse about God choosing foolish things to confound the wise. Nice review.

> 111 LolaWalser

Those sound very good. One of these days I will sit down and read more about Jesus. I'm really with Endo when he said that no book could encompass him.

Thanks everyone!

When Bad Things Happen to Good People by Harold S. Kushner
Finished 8/23/12

After finishing Endo's A Life of Jesus, I turned to the book I picked up yesterday afternoon, this popular book on suffering and God. As great as it felt to read two books in one day, Kushner's book was so light that it wasn't a big feat. This rabbi's work was wrought out of his suffering over a son who died at 14 from a rare rapid aging disorder. Since it's written out of grief rather than scholarly acumen, it carries an extra punch.

Kusher's premise is that suffering is not caused by God. He looks at Job and his pastoral experience and finds many of the pat answers unsatisfactory: "it's your fault you're suffering," "God is punishing you," "It serves a purpose or helps you grow," "It is a test of faith," "the virtuous always prosper in the long run," "You only see it as suffering because you are deluded," and "We can't know God's plan" (aka "God works in mysterious ways"). None of these sit right with Kushner, and none are useful pastorally when he is comforting peoples' grief. Rather suffering is caused by human action, the chaos and interdependent situations of the universe, and the natural laws that do not care about human suffering. God loves us and empathizes with the suffering, but is not able to stop all of it. It is up to us to do God's work in stopping suffering.

Wait, what? But the Bible is full of God stopping suffering. Miracles happen in the Bible. The Lord takes the Israelites' side in a battle and they win despite outrageous odds. God, through Moses, parts the Sea of Reeds and brings water from the rock and manna from the sky. Yet Kushner, who has a Ph.D. in Bible, doesn't address any of this. Miracles, he says, are unlikely coincidences of natural events, which we should be thankful for but not credit to God. While this follows from his theory of the universe's dealings as random, it doesn't sit well even with his Jewish Biblical tradition.

As one of my professors put it, the problem of evil leads to the meanie God (powerful enough to stop suffering but not all-loving) or the weenie God (all-loving but not powerful enough). Kushner adopts the weenie God. The weenie God is in the Bible. Think of the God who had a rough time wrestling Leviathan in Job. But the Psalms echo the almighty power of God time and time again. Kushner doesn't discuss this. God is only an emotional consolation, a psychology, but not an ontological reality who acts in the world. Ultimately, his blind spot is what does him in. I can't accept his metaphysics without throwing out huge parts of the Bible.

That said, Kushner has some very, very good pastoral advice. How often we tell wounded people tired cliches that amount to blamingthe victim or telling them they are wrong to be grieved! Job didn't need answers that were theologically correct as much as he needed empathy, compassion, and a receptive ear. Kushner's book has transformed the way I interact with people who suffer. And since it succeed in its goal as a pastoral help, I shouldn't knock its facile philosophy too much. Just take it with a grain of salt.

I heard Kushner being interviewed about this book and I would agree with you about his pastoral advice. This is obviously his forte, so I would be willing to cut him some slack on the theology. He did sound as if he had done his speech a lot though; maybe people don't notice that when they are in need of counselling.

Good review.

Very interesting comments on Endo's Life of Jesus.

As for Kushner, I read a book by him a while back and afterward felt that I had read one too many. I might be more forgiving with this one, based on its subject, but probably not as polite and respectful as you are.

Dan, do you know what the Conservative Jewish community Kushner is in thinks of him?

Selected Short Stories and Poems of Edgar Allan Poe and Nathaniel Hawthorne
Finished 8/26/12

For coursera. To recap:
"The Birthmark," "Rappaccini's Daughter," "Dr. Heidegger's Experiment," and "The Artist of the Beautiful", by Nathaniel Hawthorne
"The Fall of the House of Usher," "The Tell-Tale Heart," "The Black Cat," "The Oval Portrait," "The Facts in the Case of M. Valdemar," "The Bells," "The Raven," and "Annabel Lee" by Edgar Allan Poe

Both authors were good reading. I first encountered Poe in 8th grade and have liked him ever since, while this was my first exposure to Hawthorne. Below is my mini-essay on the Hawthorne stories:

Nathaniel Hawthorne's four short stories focus on characters attempting to use science or other means of human ingenuity to create something more sublime than nature is capable of. Like Victor Frankenstein, Owen, Dr. Heidegger, Dr. Rappaccini, and Aylmer hope to usher in a new age of human prosperity and achievement by improving upon nature's designs. Owen makes a butterfly more beautiful than any real butterfly, Heidegger attempts to cheat death, Rappaccini makes a human potent with the power to kill, and Aylmer attempts to create a perfectly beautiful woman. Each man of art or science seeks to be a modern Prometheus. Yet each one fails, as their discoveries are too sublime to last. That is, the deep intellect of each creator, unlike the omnipotent Creator, runs up against the iron wall of the laws of nature, of the limits of human perfection (Georgina's demise), or the wretched idiocy of their species (Dr. Heidegger). Their plans foiled, these geniuses find their hopes dashed, their wife or daughter dead, their life's work crushed by a small child's hand.

Although none of these stories focus on creators who build universes out of words, Hawthorne could be seen as describing the life of the novelist. No matter how lofty and sublime the author's mental conception might be, the imagination of the individual and the language they write in makes for an always imperfect creation. There is no end to editing. Hawthorne sees the agony of the artist who can envision perfection but can never reach it. But in the effort, they make significant sacrifices, and are oft-disappointed by the limits of their pen and their neighbors. An artist - or any creator - is limited by their human embodiment and the meager tools at its disposal, and their ability to live off their writing is sometimes limited by the meager minds of their audience.

>118 JDHomrighausen: Interesting reading there! I love Edgar Allan Poe too and need to read more of his stuff. The Cask of Amontillado is required reading in the 9th grade English classes in the high school where i work; most of the kids like him. It comes a big surprise to find that Nathaniel Hawthorne wrote those kinds of stories since I associate him only withe The Scarlet Letter. (Another classic I haven't read.)

I like your thoughts about the novelist too. ... their ability to live off their writing is sometimes limited by the meager minds of their audience. My youngest (he's 16 now) has always wanted to be a writer. I encourage him because he does have talent in that area; but I also tell him to get a "real" job first!

> 119

I remember my 9th grade reading! I loved To Kill a Mockingbird. The only torture was when we read to slog through Le Morte D'Arthur in that archaic English. It was awful. I don't remember anyone liking it. All through high school I always loved English class. :)

I don't remember reading that much in high school English class except a whole bunch of short stories, Romeo and Juliet, and Ethan Frome which I remember thinking was probably the most depressing book I've ever read (then and now). Our English class was divided into one semester of literature and one semester of writing. I did well when we had to read stuff and take a test but I was a terrible writer. My teacher used to hand my essays back to me and I'd think "Who DIED?" because there was so much red ink all over it. It would take me 6 or 7 re-writes to get to something that made sense. It was torture - for me and her! Years later, when I went to community college, I ended up getting an A in English 101 and tutoring English. HA!

Late bloomer :)

I read Romeo and Juliet in 9th grade and didn't like it at all. The characters are just dumb. I mean, you've known someone two days and you kill yourself thinking you can't live without them? Come on. That's not love, that's infatuated lust.

Just saw your question in #117 - sorry, don't have an answer, no clue.

Very interesting comments on Hawthorne.

>122 JDHomrighausen: That's the general consensus among the 9th grade students I work with.

Coraline by Neil Gaiman
Finished 8/30/12

After American Gods and Anansi Boys I am making a concentrated effort to work through as much Neil Gaiman this summer as I can. Although American Gods is still his most philosophically inventive book, Coraline reprises his usual theme of quest through the imagination into a world of symbols and archetypes, a world of inversions and confusions, in order to come out the other end fundamentally changed. Coraline is a young girl who enters a secret doorway in her house and finds an inverted world with fake people who have no souls. She must rely on her ingenuity and an odd pebble to escape. I read this in a few hours, and while it's intended for children it was a fun read for this adult.

The Great Poems of the Bible: A Reader's Companion with New Translations by James L. Kugel
Finished 8/28/12

Kugel, a Hebrew Bible scholar at Harvard University, has written a more popular book excerpting and commenting on various poems throughout the Jewish Bible. His guided tour through the mentality and history of the Israelites was a valuable read, connecting dots that I hadn't known about before.

Beginning with the Psalms, Kugel describes the mindset of the ancient Israelite, who saw God as a much a common topic as money and celebrities are to us now. In a world where God controls everything: nature, the caprices of personal relationships, even others' motivations, God was not a ttopic of discussion for the philosophers to speculate about but a living pre-theoretical reality to be related to.

My favorite chapter was about Biblical Wisdom, which Kugel enters into through a discussion of Job 28. Wisdom is inscrutable; it is made by God; it can be taught as a body of knowledge but also must be learned through experience. Job contends with the problem of theodicy, but doesn't realize that the divine pattern God has put in human affairs is not always apparent to the eye. The wisdom sage must be patient, must know that there is a divine plan to be trusted in, must know that man's view is too small and petty to fathom the justice of God in history. The wicked will fail, even if we don't live to see it.

From a discussion of the famous Psalm 23, Kugel turns to the topic of the afterlife. What does it mean to "dwell in the house of the Lord forever"? Ancient Israel did not have a clear conception of the afterlife, only an indefinite Sheol or place of the dead. Only in later interpretation of the already-written Bible did such a tradition arise. Commentators noticed that the Garden of Eden was never destroyed, only locked up "to guard the way to the tree of Life" (Gen. 3:24). Perhaps this is where the just went after death: a place of close intimacy with God, eating from the tree of life. Yet other parts of the Bible indicate going upwards after death, such as Elijah's being taken bodily up into heaven. Is the Garden of Eden on earth or were Adam and Eve cast out in a literal fall? Either way, the Hebrew Bible does describe something after death, and hints in places at something more definite than a bland "Sheol."

But the most poignant and sad chapter was on Psalm 137 and Lamentations, covering the seige of Jerusalem and the starvation and cannibalism the Israelites fell into. This is were Kugel excels: bringing out the human dilemmas behind these distant and often overly theologized texts. That said, his translations can at times be idiosyncratic. I don't agree with his views in the introduction on the nature of Biblical poetry and parallelism. He doesn't see any gap between poetry and prose in the Bible, but I think this comes from having an overly narrow view of the scope of parallelism and its technique. Furthermore, while his discussions of individual poems are worth reading, the chapters don't always connect very well, and particularly towards the end the book felt disjointed. But it's a good read, especially for anyone reading the Bible from a literary or historical perspective.

The David Story: a Translation with Commentary by Robert Alter
Finished 8/29/12

Much of my thoughts on Alter are over in the Salon Group Read, which dchaikin has so wonderfully set up for LT reading pleasure. All I can say here is that Alter's translation and commentary are masterful. However, the Kindle formatting was wonky, and I am only buying paper versions of his other translations. Alter emphasizes the unity of the text over historical-critical 'reconstructions' of the plethora or original sources.

The nonreligious might ask, why is this worth reading?

"The story of David is probably the single greatest narrative representation in antiquity of a human life evolving by slow stages through time, shaped and altered by the pressures of political life, public institutions, family, the impulses of body and spirit, the eventual sad decay of the flesh. It also provides the most unflinching insight into the cruel processes of history and into human behavior warped by the pursuit of power. And nowhere is the Bible's astringent narrative economy, its ability to define characters and etch revelatory dialogue in a few telling strokes, more brilliantly deployed."
- Robert Alter, "Introduction" to The David Story

"The David narratives in the books of Samuel constitute the most powerful and artistic of all of the narratives of ancient Israel. ... More than any other person, ancient Israel was fascinated by David, deeply attracted to him, bewildered by him, and occasionally embarrassed by him, yet never disowned him. David is one of those extraordinary historical figures who has a literary future. That is, his memory and presence keep generating more and more stories. ... There can be no doubt that it is David's magnificent and mysterious person that generated them, perhaps because Israel could never get it quite right. None of the stories could comprehend him, let alone contain him."
- Walter Brueggeman, "Introduction" to David's Truth: In Israel's Imagination and Memory

I find it fascinating that these two Biblical scholars at the top of their field, both writing for both scholarly and public audiences, one Jewish and one Christian, both find David the most compelling story in this huge canon.

>125 JDHomrighausen: I've seen the movie Coraline. Never stopped to think there was a book.

>126 JDHomrighausen: & 127 Love following your biblical reads here. That is interesting that David stands out so vividly in the Jewish and Christian mind.

Except for Caroline, I was already caught up here. :) More than anything else that I've come across so far in plodding along the bible, the David story reads like literature.

Have you read Good Omens: The Nice and Accurate Prophecies of Agnes Nutter, Witch by Gaiman and Pratchett? It's my favorite tale of the apocolypse. I love the angel Aziraphale's gift to Adam and Eve--that's one of my favorite moments in a Pratchett or Gaiman book.

I just finished reading a People's Bible Commentary (Concordia Pub House) by John R Mittelstaedt on 1 & 2 Samuel. The theology is a bit too fundamentalist at times, but I am making my way through the series whcih I acquired 10-15 years ago.

dchaikin, I lurk on your Alter thread, but have not posted there. We're very seldom in the same place in the Bible at the same time. I'm doing a sort of complicated rotating arc regarding what I'm reading next rather than a straight forward front to back read. I'm really enjoying the postings on Samuel & David.

#122

Um. Must put in a word for coup de foudre falling in love. It doesn't happen to everyone, or every time to anyone, but it does happen. It's terribly priggish to assume there's just one "mature" way of loving and everything else is "infatuated lust".

Most famous real life comparandum: Dante, and maybe Petrarch (perhaps unfairly, I have some reservations on the latter's account precisely because of Dante's precedent).

> 130

I'm going to pick up Good Omens at the library thanks to you. :) So what Bible commentary series do you recommend? There are so many. I have done some work with the Anchor Bible but that's all. But that's less a theological than a historical-critical and linguistic.

> 131

LolaWalser, it's true that all manner of things are possible under the sun. But in Romeo and Juliet's case I don't think this applies. They were infatuated teenagers who barely knew one another, perhaps more excited by the thrill of the forbidden fruit than by the other person him/herself.

#132

Not only are all manner of things "possible"; when it comes to love, "all manner" of things HAVE happened.

How long does one need to know someone one falls in love with at first sight? It's a nonsensical requirement.

So they were teenagers. So what? People can love at any age, children to octogenarians. (And let's not confuse forcibly platonic love with non-erotic love.) Not to mention how ordinary unions between teenagers were since there were humans.

There was an element of difficulty in their liaison? Happens often. Often makes the bonds stronger.

But tell you what, as you clearly haven't experienced this yourself, let's just agree to disagree--perhaps revisit it in thirty years, in case of updates... :)

Ha! Got you with a book bullet. Hope you enjoy it. It has a lot more of Pratchett's silliness than Gaiman's darker style to it, I think.

No idea what Bible commentary I'd recommend (that's why I lurk on threads of people that are actually putting the hard work and study into this). The one I'm reading is written for the lay person. I think Concordia has a more detailed set for the professional theologian. The authors for the two versions are the same--which makes a mess here in the LT catalog--but the 'professional' books are in the 500 or so page range instead of 200-300 pages in the lay person version.

I'm also listening to a Teaching Company course by Luke Timothy Johnson for the Pauline letters.

> 134

Luke Timothy Johnson has written a textbook, The Writings of the New Testament: An Interpretation, that is one of the few textbooks I actually enjoy reading.

Finally decided to come over here and find you since you don't have a 75ers thread. :)

Yes, I figured one journal was enough. Plus I'm already past the 75 mark so it'd just be gloating to set up a thread there. :)

I'm well past 75 too. I've tried out several groups and have been narrowing it down as time passes. I decided to go with 75ers instead of Club Read because I felt that Club Read seems a little more on the book-snob side (less likely to have YA lit and science fiction) and I felt a little silly posting all my YA lit here.

My journal is on the 75's but I pop in and out to read interesting ones whatever group they are on. But the 75'ers have a lot of fun group-read stuff going on. Some people there go for multiples of 75--the most ambitious one that I've been following is attempting 4 multiples.

Thanks for the thoughts on TLJ's book. I've added it to the quickly growing spread sheet. I have his The Great World Religions: Christianity Teaching Company course that I picked up at a library sale a while back. Guess I will have to bump it up on higher on the pile. The bad news is that it's an older copy on cassette tape which makes it hard to listen while driving.

streamsong - Way back at #130, last paragraph - Thanks. Good to know someone else is getting something out of our thread.

Back to David - Have to jump in and say what I love about him:

He had an affair. He sent his lover's husband off to die in battle. Yet, God said "David is a man after my own heart."

Always makes me think "Hey! I can be THAT good! Maybe I'm ok!"

Second favorite: Paul - paraphrased "Why do I always do the things I don't want to do ad don't do the things I want to do." I can just so relate.

> 138

I chose not to use 75ers because I thought they'd think I was a snob for reading so much dense nonfiction.

But alas, I am reading none of that, since I will be in the middle of moving for the next week and can only hope for light fiction. Will post short reviews from the last week soon.

I am sorry I've been absent for a week or so. Crazy week. However there seem to be some themes emerging for September reading:

1. The Lucifer series by Mike Carey. These graphic novels follow the adventures of their titular character after he abdicates his infernal throne to play piano at a bar in Germany. Since it's a spinoff from Neil Gaiman's Sandman series, some of the characters from that series show up. So far I've finished 2 out of the 11.

2. Science fiction, including the ongoing Coursera class.

3. Biblical fiction, especially Old Testament tales.

Any suggestions?

haha! Do the 75ers have an anti-snob air? I hadn't noticed. It's not that I felt unwelcome here, it's just that I felt I was getting more comments on my thread over there. I suppose that may be the same for you--only in the opposite direction. :)

ETA: I have no problem at all with book snobs. I think they're very discerning, actually, and I respect their ability to read ONLY literary works. However, I don't like it when snobs mock other people for their tastes. But I haven't seen a lot of that on LibraryThing (except maybe on the Literary Snobs group).

I used to get more responses on my 75 Book thread, but now I get more here. For what it's worth.

you have a fan club here rebecca and I am certainly a member.

> 144

What is a "literary" work? I'm not sure such a thing is easily identified. Charles Dickens was not considered "literary" when it came out. Much of the Coursera stuff we're reading is not "literary."

You might want to ask a book snob that question. But here's an example: Zone One, by Colson Whitehead is considered a "literary work" yet it's a zombie novel. I'm curious to read a literary zombie novel, so plan to read it this month.

I think "literary" works are books that aren't supposed to fit in a genre. They are the types of books that are nominated for the Booker prize, the Pulitzer Prize, and other "literary" awards. They pride themselves on beautiful writing and deep meaning. They scoff at genre.

For instance, Margaret Atwood does not appreciate when people call her works "science fiction." Because she writes "literature." :D She'll never win the Nobel prize if people keep accusing her of writing genre fiction. ;)

Novels weren't considered literary in Dickens' time, because people scoffed at fiction in general. Much like some people scoff at genre fiction now.

Technically, nothing in the Coursera class is "literary" because its all genre fiction. ;) But they're classics.

But these biases about what is literary and what isn't are so arbitrary. So maybe in Dickens' time, they thought novels weren't literary. Now we have the bias that genre fiction isn't literary. (Notice how few literature professors study genre fiction and how many study The Classics.) In the last few decades we've also been breaking the idea that comics and graphic novels aren't literary. (I dare anyone who thinks that to read Alan Moore's Promethea or Neil Gaiman's Sandman.)

I think the idea that behind that bias is that fiction that follows a set pattern - e.g. Western, mystery, fantasy, sci-fi, etc. - doesn't have as much originality as fiction that doesn't fit a set genre. But that's nonsense. Non-genre fiction can still follow a pre-set story. Bad or uninventive story-telling plagues every genre. I can see why Atwood doesn't like being called "sci-fi," perhaps also because she doesn't like being pigeonholed. In the same way, Toni Morrison doesn't like her novels being called "African-American literature," because while her characters tend to be, the topics and themes are universal. I can understand that.

Now, that said, I have seen plenty of sci-fi and fantasy with highly inventive story-telling, beautiful prose, philosophical inventiveness, and other things we deem "literary." I don't know of any Westerns or mysteries like that. Do you? Who are some authors that, shall we say, transcend the limits of their genre in the way Neil Gaiman or Margaret Atwood do?

I totally agree with you that our perception of "literary" is vague and changeable. But I'm a person who thinks fantastic writing and philosophical inventiveness can be found in YA lit. I've always thought that people who scoff at genre fiction are missing out on an awful lot of really good, meaningful, beautiful books.

Although I haven't read very many of Cormac McCarthy's books, some of them would fall in the Western genre...only he writes "literary" novels so he doesn't count. Some of Umberto Eco's or even The Little Stranger, by Sarah Walters are mysteries....only those are "literary" novels and so don't count.

You see, the problem is that as soon as a book has reached "literary" stage, then it is considered genre-defying and is taken out of the cesspool of genre fiction. ;)

I agree about YA fiction. My girlfriend got me to read The Hunger Games and it was better than I thought it would be. Very thought-provoking. If something is good literature for young adults, then it's likely good literature for adults too.

That said, I draw the line at Hank the Cowdog. :P

I agree that The Hunger Games had some good themes to it...though I found it too violent to finish the series. I heard the violence just gets worse in the second and third books, and all those kids dying made me feel sick.

So yesterday I was settled in quite well in my dorms. Then housing called and said there was a snafu, my suitemate and I were put in the wrong dorm. So I moved again today. Thankfully they paid me $200 for my bother and sent guys to help me move.

Ugh.

So I'm at 22 boxes of books, and thankfully suitemate is okay with me putting a bookcase in the living room. Yipee.

What I've been reading lately:

The Invisible Man by H.G. Wells
Finished 8/30/12

Another read for Coursera, which I'm not barely keeping up with. Yikes.

The Invisible Man recapitulates a basic theme found in much of the literature of this course: a man who reaches for greatness via the brilliance of his invention and creation, yet tragically fails to reach it. He then becomes an anti-hero, as his flaws and failings drive him to use his brilliance for monstrous ends. In this case, Griffin's discovery of the ability to become invisible led first to personal terror, then to a decision to begin a Reign of Terror on all humankind. His anger and megalomania lead to his downfall and to his use of this invention to harm others.

What makes Griffin's telling of his own story so striking is that, like Frankenstein's monster, there is a kind of sense behind his words. His actions makes sense within his motives of a big name in science and a lasting contribution to humanity. But this rationality is a twisted one. It is rationality that is calculated to take in every factor but the feelings of other humans. Griffin's personal failings lead to the twisted use of his invention. Over and over again the stories we've read in this class bring up this point. How unfailingly do we trust scientists to use their power for good? What harm can a scientist do? Ironically, we have science fiction critiquing its namesake.

Coraline by Neil Gaiman
Finished 8/30/12

Gaiman at his usual inventive best. Still not as thought-provoking as American Gods but a fun little story, great for children and adults.

The Island of Dr. Moreau by H.G. Wells
Finished 9/1/12

Wells didn't do as well on this one as he did on Invisible Man. The other novel was better paced and had more dramatic irony. This one was also pretty bloody and grotesque. Yuck.

David's Truth: In Israel's Imagination and Memory by walter Brueggemann
Finished 9/1/12

Longer review coming later.

Perelandra by C.S. Lewis
Finished 9/2/12

There's a horror story here. I read the first in this trilogy, Out of the Silent Planet, in May, and was reading this on the plane to Nepal when I found the previous owner tore out chapter 11! And you can't find C.S. Lewis in Nepal very easily. So I had to wait until I got back to photocopy chapter 11 from the library. Turns out it was very pivotal to the plot.

This is definitely one of the weirdest books I have ever read. Lots of thick description and very little plot. If you're into philosophical dialogues between a Godly man and Satan while with Eve on Mars, then great. Otherwise stay away.

That Hideous Strength by C.S. Lewis
Finished 9/3/12

My favorite of the trilogy. Well-plotted and a good theological adventure story.

Lucifer: Devil in the Gateway by Mike Carey
Finished 9/4/12

Carey's series takes over from Neil Gaiman's Sandman series where Lucifer abdicates his throne and goes to earth to play piano in a German bar. Good story-telling. I hope to finish all 11 by the end of the month.

Lucifer: Children and Monsters by Mike Carey
Finished 9/5/12

Another good Lucifer story. He's a surprisingly likeable character.

Jesus Christ -- Special Edition by Amar Chitra Katha
Finished 9/5/12

In the vein of Biblical storytelling this month, I read this comic book I picked up in Nepal. The Amar Chitra Katha series are comic book adaptations of famous tales from Indian myth and folklore, both Hindu and Buddhist, and this was a special edition with a foreward by a Catholic bishop in India. The art was so bad it was good, like when the artist drew a giant pair of hands coming from a cloud to take Jesus to heaven when he says "Into thy hands I commend my spirit." LOL. Very kitschy and fun for that reason.

The Lilies of the Field by William Barrett
Finished 9/7/12

A traveling laborer runs into some German nuns who believe God sent them to finish their chapel. A charming parable but also a simplistic one.

Goliath by Tom Gauld
Finished 9/8/12

This short book (finished in half an hour) portrays Goliath not as a mean fighting machine, but as a gentle, calm, and abnormally tall (8') man who detests violence and is horrible at swordfighting. As an administrator in the army, he suggests to the king that they send forth a champion rather than fight as armies, so there will be less bloodshed. He doesn't foresee that the king will choose him to be that champion. The king schemes that no Israelite will step forward to fight such a big man, and the enemy army will simply run away. But the Philistine king didn't foresee David. A fun little novel giving a good "What if?" story.

Catching Fire by Suzanne Collins
Finished 9/9/12

Not as inventive as the first, but every bit as nerve-wrenching. When my girlfriend reads the third I'll round out the series.

Herland by Charlotte Perkins Gilman
Finished 9/12/12

A group of intrepid young men stunmble upon an isolated all-female civilization. Expecting a bunch of petty girls, they instead find a utopian society far lacking in poverty, disease, crime, or any other kind of disharmony. Gilman is a lukewarm storyteller, but this book was a good thought experiment. When she wrote the book in 1915, I imagine the idea that gender roles are highly constructed hadn't made it to a lot of circles yet. This book makes it clear that women would be very different without men - perhaps less "womanly" but much more confident, powerful, and unfearful.

I think I found out about the movie, The Lilies of the Field, through Sydney Poitier's autobiography. I really liked the movie, never thought of picking up the book. Maybe I should.

Another good Lucifer story. He's a surprisingly likeable character. HA!

Herland also sounds interesting, but I don't think an all girl society would be as wonderful as she thinks it would be. LOL! I can understand her feminist motives, though - especially considering it was 1915 when she wrote it.

Enjoyed your mini-reviews!

Thank you! Yeah, I've never bought the idea that a female society would be peaceful and loving. The fighting might just be more subtle. But who knows how women would change if there were no men to compete over.

The Lilies of the Field book is skippable.

Re: Herland I am still struggling through Herland because I find it very grating and a little boring. However, in defense of her perfection--I don't think she means that women are perfect. I think what she's trying to convey is that women would be completely different if they no longer had the influence of males. In the sense that they no longer have men to impress, so they don't need fripperies and vanities. They don't have men to lose or win, so they have less to fight about.

That said, I find the the perfection quite gag-worthy. :)

Re: Island of Dr Moreau I didn't read it this time around because I decided to make the load easier by skipping books that I've already read. However, this is many people's favorite....so clearly it's a matter of taste. :)

Re: Coraline I loved this one too. Did you read the graphic novel or the long-narrative form?

Re: C.S. Lewis...I read That Hideous Strength years ago and have been meaning to get back to the trilogy for a long time. I wonder was there something objectionable about Chapter 11?

Re: Catching Fire never got that fire. Too queasy. :)

Impressive list J, 13 books in two weeks! I'll certainly be interested in your review of Brueggemann's book.

> 157

But they were all short, light reads! Now that the madness of moving in is over I can get into heavier stuff. Still focusing on Biblical fiction. School starts next week.

> 156

I agree with you about Herland. It's a conceptually interesting novel, but Gilman has all those weird section where she summarizes what happens over a long time period rather than showing through dialogue and action. I also find it annoying when her narrator says things like "Later I found out that.... but more on that later." However her use of three men, two with exaggeratedly stereotypical and common views of women for men to hold, was quite masterful. I too wanted to punch Terry in the face.

Chapter 11 in Perelandra was one of the most beautiful and deep chapters in the book. I won't spoil it for you though. So maybe they tore it out to keep it? But then why not keep the whole book?

I too am impressed by how many books you've been reading!

Another good Lucifer story. He's a surprisingly likeable character. HA!

I found myself rather liking the devil in The Master and Margarita.

Cain by Jose Saramago
Finished 9/13/12

"And Cain said unto the Lord, My punishment is greater than I can bear. Behold, thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the earth; and from thy face shall I be hid; and I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond in the earth; and it shall come to pass, that every one that findeth me shall slay me. And the Lord said unto him, Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold. And the Lord set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him. And Cain went out from the presence of the Lord, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden. And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch." (Genesis 4:13-17, KJV)

This book is part of my September theme of Biblical fiction. Saramago has deviated deliciously far from the Biblical text in chronicling the adventures of Cain in and after he "dwelt in the land of Nod." In Nod, Cain becomes the lover of the city's queen, Lilith, supposedly the first Eve in post-Biblical Jewish myth. He then leaves the city and moves from present to present, intruding on various scenes in the Torah. Throughout the novel he is trying to make sense of his curse to be a wanderer, perhaps for all eternity.

Cain comes off as an average man, not the vengeful person he was when he murdered his cocky and gloating brother in a rage. He wanders in on Abraham with the angels in his tent, on the binding of Isaac, on Noah preparing his ark and the big flood. Cain is condemned to not only wander through space, but through time, stumbling in on moments that are in the timeless time of myth. Whether or not there was a real Abraham in chronos time, the stories told about Abraham in the Torah are ever-present in the minds of those who internalize them. Abraham is always struggling with God's command to sacrifice his son, just as his hand is always stayed at the last moment, just as he is always being told his descendents will be as numerous as the stars in the sky. But Cain wanders through patches of mythic time in a linear chronos fashion. The writing style itself evokes the orality of myth, as it has no punctuation marks and is told in page-long paragraphs.

And what does Cain see? He sees a mean God: a God who toys with Job's life like a kitten with a mouse, a God who kills the children of Sodom for the sins they aren't even old enough to know their fathers commit, a God who floods the world on a whim. Cain has a score to settle with this God, a God who shows up now and then in the story and is always an arrogant and prideful character. Cain calls to account this God who has no small lack in power, knowledge, and love. And this comes to be the meaning of Cain's endless voyage: how can a God who is recorded as being so petty be so loving?

For me this story points to another aspect of the Bible - or even just that foundational part of it, the Torah. How can we call this stitched-together, disparate text one tradition? Modern source criticism has divided up the Torah into four different authors, from the anthropomorphising Yahwist to the priestly Levitical (most famously know as the author of the "begat" sections). Yet religious tradition sees this patchwork quilt as a monolithic entity. How can the God of love, the God who looks into the heart of David, the God who finds Job so favorable, be the same God who casts away Lot's wife and lets Job be decimated by Satan? Cain only knows the latter God, the God who favored his brother's offering for no apparent reason. And disillusion - or hurt - Cain is too jaded to believe the angels when they tell him that God's ways are a mystery.

Overall, this was a book that didn't fully make sense until the end, but it was also short enough that this was not a problem. A theological meditation definitely worth reading. Perhaps Cain and God are still bickering to this day.

Some background on Saramago's reasons for writing the novel:

""About the holy book, I tend to say: read the Bible and you’ll lose your faith,” said the first, and so far only, Portuguese-language writer to receive the Nobel Literature Prize, which he won in 1998.

In a meeting with the press Wednesday, Saramago repeated the ideas he expressed at an event Sunday in the northern Portuguese town of Penafiel, held to launch his latest book, “Cain”, which retells the story of Adam and Eve’s first-born son in a light-hearted, irreverent tone.

According to Saramago, there is nothing “divine” in the Bible. And although “Cain” has offended the Church, it won’t offend Catholics, he said, because “they don’t read the Bible.”

It took “a thousand years and dozens of generations” to write the Bible, which depicts a “cruel, spiteful, vengeful, jealous and unbearable God,” said the writer, who recommended people not to trust “the God depicted in the Bible.”

He said he would not have to settle accounts with God, because “the human brain is a great creator of absurd notions, and God is the most absurd one of all.”"

http://www.ipsnews.net/2009/10/portugal-bible-is-a-catalogue-of-cruelties-says-s...

Here he sounds much like a vitriolic village atheist with a one-sided view of the world. But clearly he is not only that, as this was a nuanced book that got me thinking about the humans of the Bible - even for this Catholic.

Lion's Honey: The Myth of Samson by David Grossman
Finished 9/15/12

Like Saramago's book, this retelling of the myth of Samson is written not by an author trying to instill religious faith, but a well-known secular novelist who wishes to look at this culturally influential text. Unlike Saramago, Grossman is not writing a philosophical polemic, but rather a look into the psyche of Samson.

And what a lot of psyche is there. Samson is one of those Biblical characters whose presence in the Judeo-Christian imagination is much larger than the scant space he occupies in the canon - only four chapters in Judges. I can't think of any other character in the Bible who combines such zealous holiness with a comically exaggerated virility, sexuality, and physical prowess. Yet Grossman sees in Samson a man perpetually alienated from those around him, seeking intimacy in which to reveal vulnerability. But it always eludes him. His oafish and loafish father is bewildered and cowed by his son, and his mother knows the secret of his strength but can't possibly understand it. So Samson seeks a woman to share his secret with.

So why does Samson always choose women of the Philistines, Israel's oppressive enemy? From his wife from Timnah, to the Philistine prostitute, to Delilah, he somehow wants his intimacy to be with someone completely foreign. The tragedy is that both his wife and Delilah betray him. One can imagine Samson's despair and sadness that drives him to send the burning foxes' tails into Philistine land. This despair is deepened after his second betrayal, when the Delilah he placed so much hope in turns him over to the enemy. Grossman speculates that Samson told her the secret of his strength because he saw no point to living in a world where nobody could truly love him.

So Samson dies as he lives: alone, in a place where he has no home. His life is a tragedy, even though as a judge he is a wild success who destroys the Philistine elite in his dying act. Just as the four chapters about him in Judges remain opaque for us, Samson was such a riddle to those around him, both a riddle-poser and a riddle himself. Grossman's look at this man set apart from birth gave me a lot of insight into this long-haied powerhouse.

Enjoying your reviews and the range of books you are reading.

Looking forward to your thoughts on Jung, the archetypes and the collective unconscious which has been an important part of my imaginative world for a few years now.

Thanks for your interesting review of Cain. I like Saramago's thoughtful writing, even if his punctuation tends to be a bit odd.

I think it's funny that he said he wouldn't offend Catholics because they don't read the Bible. But it's somewhat true, isn't it? I think the Catholic Church has only recently begun encouraging people read-the-bible-through. Perhaps post-Vatican II? You and I grew up in a generation entirely post-Vatican II, but there are plenty of people (including Saramago) who didn't.

I enjoyed the one book by Saramago that I've read, The History of the Siege of Lisbon, and have several more on the TBR, but not Cain. Based on your review, I think I'll take a look at that too.

Great reviews of both Cain and Lion's Honey: The Myth of Samson, Jonathan. I've yet to read Saramago or Grossman, though I have works by both of them.

Thanks Rachel, Rebecca, and Dewald. I enjoyed reading these too.

> 164

Rachel, are you Catholic? I think there's some truth about what Saramago said. I don't know about Portugal, but in America a lot of Catholics don't read the Bible. I'm in my third of four years of a Bible program taught by the School of Ministry (a program to train lay ministers including deacons) at the Diocese of Stockton. This isn't a devotional Bible study but more like a religious studies course where we look at the theological, historical, and literary aspects of Bible book-by-book. The sad thing is that in a big diocese of thousands and thousands of people, only ~15 people wanted to take this course! Old (i.e. medieval) habits die hard.

Yes, I am Catholic. And I admit to one of the deadly sins...I envy you for being able to study theology. I wish I could have, but I don't know what on earth I would do with a degree in religious studies or theology or anything along those lines.

I plan to teach. Research. Something like that. I'd like to be involved in academia but I'd also like to teach outside the university setting. Perhaps some adult ed or giving workshops/lectures at different parishes. So for me studying theology is aiming toward grad school. Not that that adds any pressure...

My fall courses and reading schedules are in.

CLAS 21: Ancient Greek (1st quarter)
Erikk Geannikis, Greek Paradigm Handbook
Cynthia Shelmerdine, Introduction to Greek, Second Edition

SCTR 19: Religions of the Book (a course introducting the Tanakh, NT, and Quran, and looking at how these texts play into contemporary social, political, and theological issues)
Kristin Swenson, Bible Babel: Making Sense of the Most Talked About Book of All Time
Jon Levenson, Sinai and Zion: An Entry Into the Jewish Bible
Massimo Campanini, The Qur'an: The Basics
Francisco Ayala, Darwin and Intelligent Design
The New Oxford Annotated Bible
Abdullah Yusuf Ali, The Meaning of the Holy Qur'an

HNRS 20: Honors Seminar on Technology and Social Justice
John Elkington, The Power of Unreasonable People: How Social Entrepreneurs Create Markets that Change the World

Scripture Institute, year 3 (using the University of Dallas Curriculum): Old Testament Continued: Exile and Restoration
Lawrence Boadt, Reading the Old Testament
Thomas Leclerc, Introduction to the Prophets
Abraham Joshua Heschel, The Prophets

I am also signed up for a class on early medieval literature but I will find out the books for that later.

Enjoyed reading about your Biblical fiction Cain and Lion's Honey.
Perhaps Cain and God are still bickering to this day. Probably.
I've always felt sorry for Samson; guess I'm not the only one.

Your "Religions of the Book" class looks the most interesting, IMO. But, oh, I do not wish to trade places with you at this moment because I'm sure with all that incredibly interesting reading comes a list of essays and research papers to write.

> 170

That course has a class journal and a research paper. But I like writing and researching. It's big exams that I don't really like, like all the memorization and cramming I bet you had to do for your medical coding certificate! Yikes!

>171 JDHomrighausen: I feel the same way

Oooooooh I want to hear about the Elkington book! (Different title than my touchstone.)

all the memorization and cramming I bet you had to do for your medical coding certificate! Yikes!
Haha! It wasn't that bad but I certainly wouldn't want to spend another 6 hours (OK, 5 hours and 40 minutes) doing THAT again. Once was more than enough! Or another week of walking around the house in endless circles knowing for sure I had failed & would have to go back & do it again. The HORROR!

I like writing & researching too, but I find it a little intimidating to hand over my work for someone else to pick apart.

You must have telepathically set a seed in my brain, because I ordered Lion's Honey yesterday. I'm interested in David Grossman.

I read Cain earlier this year and was less enamored than you. One problem I had with it was that I had just read all the stuff, and, well, I wasn't sure why I needed to read an exact summation all over again. (Telling me about the bible's horrors isn't news to me.) A second problem was that I didn't sense Saramago taking it very far. That could be my problem, more than the books. The one exception, or the one thing I did pick up on, which you mention in slightly different way, was the effect in the way he jumps from story to story, back and forth in biblical time. You noted the "timeless time of myth", a concept I love. For me, it felt like, while I was linearly reading through Cain, I was opening the bible at random, here and there, flipping through.

Enjoyed both reviews. I'm wowed and continually rewarded by reading about all these books you are going through.

Thanks for posting the list of books you are reading for class. Very impressive. I am curious when you read about other religions whether you read the books that people of that religion would read, or read about them from a Catholic/Christian perspective. For example, when I see a title like "An Entry into the Jewish Bible," it makes me think it is written from a Christian rather than a Jewish perspective; on the other hand, Abraham Joshua Heschel is definitely writing from a Jewish perspective, so maybe you're getting a mixture, which is probably a good idea!

> 175

Let me know what you think of Lion's Honey, Dan. :) What do you mean about Saramago not taking it very far? For me it was hard to understand what Cain was doing until the very end. He says that he must keep wandering because there must be some meaning to it, but I never get the feeling there's a well-defined quest. I won't say any more for fear of spoiling it for Rebecca.

> 176

Actually the "Sinai and Zion" book is specifically from a Jewish perspective, and is written by a Jewish biblical scholar. That my Catholic university and Catholic scripture program would use sources written by Jews says a lot. However I think the book we're reading about the Qur'an is written by a non-Muslim (unless he's an Italian who converted).

In other threads I've commented on the issues I have with how Christians often read the Hebrew Bible, very casually proclaiming that Jesus is predicted here or the Trinity is obviously referred to there. We often forget that these texts had - for centuries before Christ - and have now meanings and interpretations that refer to none of these things. Are we to call these wrong? Do Jews just not know their Bible? So it's doubly important that we see these texts in their original environs and readings.

#177 (from 160/175) The end was OK, vaguely clever. But overall Cain felt to me like a book report on the bible, with some generally pornographic extra info. Didn't offer much to me except some distraction. I didn't mind reading it, just wasn't rewarding. But then, I likely missed the key points.

> 176

Speaking of texts for class, I found out there was more today. My technology and social justice class required a massive $145 reader. Ugh.

I was able to crash and get into a class on the history and spirituality of the Jesuits. I'm excited, especially since they have done a lot of interreligious dialogue, and they were to my knowledge the first order to bring the Roman Catholic church into Asia. They did so in a careful, methodical style, learning quite a bit about the cultures and religions they encountered, so as to better understand and evangelize to them.

Reading list:
Gerald McKevitt (my professor), Brokers of Culture: Italian Jesuits in the American West, 1848-1919
St. Ignatius of Loyola, Autobiography
Stefan Kiechle, Art of Discernment: Making Good Decisions in Your World of Choices
James Martin, S.J., In Good Company: The Fast Track from the Corporate World to Poverty, Chastity, and Obedience
Jonathan Wright, God's Soldiers: Adventures, Politics, Intrigue, Power -- A History of the Jesuits (touchstone won't work)
And a course reader.

*Phew*

Thanks for the explanation, Jonathan. It's surprising (to me, anyway) to see a Jewish scholar calling the Torah, etc. "the Jewish Bible." And yes, it is admirable that your Catholic university uses Jewish sources and (hopefully) Muslim ones as well.

Interesting thoughts on Cain and Lion's Honey, both of which I added to the wishlist. Just based on your descriptions they remind me a bit of Robert Graves's King Jesus which is a historical novel that deviates pretty significantly from the Bible. Have you read it?

> 181

Jane, it's on my list. But I have such a big pile of Biblical fiction that I want to work through Old Testament fiction before I get into New.

182 - Makes sense. I'll be interested to see what else you've got in the pipe. I find religious fiction very interesting.

Autobiography of St. Ignatius, in Ignatius of Loyola: Spiritual Exercises and Selected Works, by St. Ignatius of Loyola
Finished 9/18/12

Ignatius' short autobiography, the first book my History of the Jesuits course is reading, is a spotty document. Despite being the founder of one of the most (in)famous and historically important religious orders in Christendom, little is known about the life of this priest from a small Spanish village. This work is in spots, and only covers topics related to his conversion, pilgrimages, and the founding of the order.

Ignatius was a courtier in King Ferdinand's court, a young man boasting of "vainglory" and power, when he was felled by a cannonball shot to the leg at the Battle of Pamplona against the French. His recuperation allowed him the time to reflect on his life that he needed to begin effecting his interior conversion. Now knowing the difference between desolation and consolation, Ignatius went on a Pilgrimage. He aroused the interest not only of wealthy patrons and all manner of people seeking spiritual help, but also of the Inquisition. Realizing he needed to study more, Ignatius went to Paris, and after his bachelor's and master's he goes to Rome. In 1540 the Jesuits are founded.

Ignatius' story reminds me of the Tibetan monks I met in Nepal. One of them, our meditator teacher, Lama Urgyen, came to a dinner party on the last day of class for a classmate's birthday. I was fortunate enough to sit next to him. But we couldn't have an ordinary conversation, because every topic would lead him back to dharma. This was someone for whom every occasion is a time to teach and preach. I get the same feeling from Ignatius. He's less telling his life story for the sake of peoples' interest in him and more using his life story as spiritual lessons for others.

So Ignatius is always shrouded in mystery, because he barely mentions his life before his conversion at 26. He doesn't dwell much on the founding of the order but does a lot on his interior life, both consolations and desolations. Yet the challenges facing "the pilgrim," as the text refers to him, are so much like our lives today that we can easily identify and transform those afflictions in ourselves, whether it be temptation, depression, or public shame. Overall a great book by a spiritual giant.

The Martian Chronicles by Ray Bradbury
Finished 9/18/12

This is by far my favorite of all the books I've read for the Coursera fantasy and science fiction course. Bradbury crafts myth in high diction, and the science fiction aspect of it for him is less a constraining genre than a unique idiom. This book is a series of vignettes, covering 27 years and detailing the stages of exploration of Mars. How will going to Mars change humanity? What consequences might result from it?

Bradbury subverts the typical Mars adventure story (think of A Princess on Mars). His characters land, meet the Martians, and are promptly thrown into an insane asylum. They find a land of mystery, a land where cities that look abandoned are cornucopias to the Martians. They find a blank slate onto which they can project their imaginations. Overall an amazing book, one that left me needing to think it through once more.

Enjoyed reading your reviews of the St. Ignatius autobio. & The Martian Chronicles. Haven't read much Bradbury but the few things I have read I've really liked. Overall an amazing book, one that left me needing to think it through once more. To me that's a hallmark of a truly good book.

Another view of twentieth century Jesuits can be found in The Jesuits: The Society of Jesus and the Betrayal of the Roman Catholic Church about the struggle between the Church concerned with the afterlife, and the SJ, concerned with life in the here and now for so many people who struggle each day just to survive. It is written by Malachi Martin, a former Jesuit.

The Memory Palace of Matteo Ricci is the biography of one of the early Jesuits in China, interesting on many fronts.

> 187

I loved Spence's book! I only read part of it though. I hope to revisit it.

I've seen Malachi Martin's book, but it looked like a shrill polemic, and for various reasons he is not the most credible or unbiased person to learn about the Jesuits from. So I've mostly avoided it. But I'm open to being sold on it.

Bible Babel: Making Sense of the Most Talked About Book of All Time by Kristin Swenson
Finished 9/19/12

Swenson's book, one of the texts for my "Religions of the Book" class, is supposed to be an introduction to the Bible for the educated public. She gives an overview of Biblical history, of how the Bible was written, of the different voices in Scripture. She then moves through the Bible, not text-by-text but topic by topic: famous men, women, places, and references in the text.

I did learn some interesting facts and theories. Jonah was possibly written to show tat there could be goodness in non-Israelite lands. "Satan" in the Hebrew Bible referred generally to an adversary, natural or super, and not to the proper-nouned specific being of later Zoroastrian-influenced Hellenistic Jewish lore. This is not necessarily identical to the "Baal zebub", or "lord of the flies," in 2 Kings. People still speculate about the lost tribes of Israel. The word "baal," besides referring to a Canaanite deity, is sometimes used to refer to Israel's God in the sense of a master or husband. The Greek "Ichythys," a Greek fish, also refers to Jesus. The "ruach elohim," or spirit of God, in the Tanakh is hard to equate with the Christian Holy Spirit, but the ruach elohim is feminine. Hell, despite its huge place in the history of Christian lore, gets very little mention in the New Testament, and isn't the same as the scarcely-mentioned Sheol (place of the dead) in the Hebrew Bible. The Bible is unclear about the moral status of fetuses.

But that was the problem with Swenson's book. It got to be a very tired litany of facts and trivia about the Bible and its references in pop culture. By the last 50-70 pages the book had become a chore.

I've found there are two types of books about the Bible: books that explain everything about the Bible so that one need not read it, and books that explain only enough to point the reader back to the text. Most "introduction to Bible" books do the former, yet only the latter are worth reading. So rather than Swenson's tedious and chatty scroll, pick up a footnoted Bible and discover the Biblical storytelling impulse for yourself.

The King David Report by Stefan Heym
Finished 9/21-22/12

Ethan the Scribe, an eloquent historian, has been summoned to King Solomon's royal court. His task: to write The One and Only True and Authoritative, Historically Correct, and Officially Approved Report on the Amazing Rise, God-fearing Life, Heroic Deeds, and Wonderful Achievements of David the Son of Jesse, King of Judah for Seven years and of Both Judah and Israel for Thirty-three, Chosen of God, and Father of King Solomon. This book chronicles Ethan's perilous time writing this propaganda piece for this fickle and mean-spirited king.

Ethan rapidly realizes that he is in perilous waters: many of those surrounding King David's life are still alive, give different stories, and have power over him. Furthermore, he must put unflattering events in the text, else the Israelites who remember those events will not believe Solomon's propaganda piece. How does one tell enough truth to be credible but spin it enough to still make David look good? Ethan cannot win. After including information about David's alliance with the Philistines and his adulterous possession of Bathsheba, Solomon doesn't exactly find Ethan favorable.

What makes this story very interesting, aside from Heym's ability to help the reader keep track of many long-named characters, is the reflections on history-writing. Ethan never lies; he only tells the truth in a tactful and flattering way. When does this move from history to propaganda? To what extent is all history - which is all interpretation - propaganda? In the midst of this Ethan is attempting to satisfy King Solomon while trying to sate his own curiosity for the truth, which makes him visit some characters who do not think so highly of David (e.g. Joab, Michal).

But while this seems like a work of Biblical fiction alone, Heym's concern is with what happens to history when it is in the control of a totalitarian state. Heym escaped from Nazi Germany, and his concern with propaganda is only told in this Biblical setting as an allegory. Yet he's also done his research on the various personalities of David's life. I go back to the David stories with a more critical eye to the purpose and bias of the narrator - not something we often think about in a text supposedly divine and perfectly true.

Though Ethan's time in Jerusalem is traumatic, and King Solomon and the other members of the royal court are fickle and grotesque characters, Ethan in one sense is the victor. His account of David was later known as 1 and 2 Samuel. And he knows his power as a writer:

"'You were once among the might of the kindgdom, and among those who decided if a man was to be put to death or alloowed to live out his days in peace. But I decide how a man lives on after he is dead, in the eyes of the generations to come, and if a thousand years hence he is viewed as a frightened dotard, spittle running into his beard, or as a soldier facing his fate with dignity and with courage.'" - Ethan

Too bad about the Swenson, but couldn't agree more about your final points. So much I read about the bible seems to have an unprinted premiss that the reader will read that article/book in place of the bible. So, instead of illuminating, they are summarizing with their own emphasis.

See the group read thread for comments on Heym. Enjoyed your review.

ETA - a missing "un-"

I'm glad I'm not the only one, Dan. Even worse are textbooks written about the Bible, since textbooks are often written under the assumption that the more unsynthesized information can be thrown in, the better (and bigger, therefore better) the book will be. I'm convinced that's how Stephen L. Harris' popular and unreadable Bible textbooks were written.

Comparative Theology: Deep Learning Across Religious Borders by Francis X. Clooney. S.J.
Finished 9/27/12

I have heard much over the years of Clooney's brand of theology, an amalgam of comparative religion and theology. Clooney, a Jesuit and scholar of Hinduism, dialogues his personal and scholarly knowledge and Hinduism with his standpoint as a Catholic theologian seeking to learn from that tradition. Surprisingly, comparative theology is becoming a rather hot topic in Catholic theology. One of the top Catholic theology programs in the country, Boston College, has much of its department revolving around the field. After Clooney built up the program at Boston he moved to Harvard Divinity School where he still teaches.

Though Clooney explores a different religion than I do - him Hinduism, I Christianity - his examples throughout the book are illuminating. The comparative theologian seeks to step out of her religious tradition and into another, out of a curiosity - a movement of the Spirit? - to learn from it. This practice is highly personal - like all theology, it's one scholar's exploration, rooted in their faith. As a personal practice, it's also specific and contextua. There's no such thing as a "Catholic scholar dialoguing with Buddhism." There may be a French Carmelite Catholic doing comparative theology with a certain school of Tibetan Buddhism, or an American Benedictine learning from Hasidic Judaism. The comparative theologian, after learning from the other tradition, goes back to his own with those insights.

While some may worry that this practice is some new age mumbo-jumbo leading the Church astray, Clooney notes that "Comparative theology, however labyrinthine, can lead us back to our core commitments; the wider learning need not undercut faith's particularity. ... If my comparative theology leads anywhere, it should lead back to Christ" (107). This has definitely been my experience. Reading Asvaghosa's Buddhacarita (an epic poem telling the Buddha's life story) gave me profound insight into Jesus in the Gospels, into how both were adept in sensing others' suffering in a highly intuitive way. Learning about Buddhism relics helped me see that relics in Catholicism can be a valid devotional practice. Seeing the huge emphasis in Buddhism on intention as a standard of ethics helped me see that we can do good things for bad reasons, and that's sometimes as bad as doing bad things for bad reasons.

One point that resonated with me was the contrast between comparative theology and apologetics. Often Christian apologists paint other religions in a way to contrast them with Christianity. For example, I've heard apologists describe Buddhism as a nihilistic, hopeless religion, in contrast to the saving hope of Christ. But Buddhism cannot be reduced to this insulting caricature. Christianity often paints portraits of other religions based on how they lack something Christianity has: Judaism lacks a Savior and love above the law, polytheistic religions lack the absolute strength and might of the Christian God. Comparative theologians can make Christians aware of the self-definitions of these religions. They can be ambassadors from the other tradition to Christianity, both in order to destroy these straw men and in order to help Christians dialogue with these religions as they actually are.

And that's where I come in. When I was at a conference and heard a speaker go on about how Buddhism was so nihilistic and hopeless, I winced, because I knew that was not the truth. These kind of straw men fuel more ignorance, and sometimes even violence.

I also like how Clooney drew the line connecting missionary activity to other religions. His order, the Jesuits, in a sense began all of this. Jesuits in Asia in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, such as Robert de Nobili, Matteo Ricci, and Hippolyte Desideri, had to draw complex lines between culture and religion as part of their enculturation method. They also had to understand the religions they were trying to draw converts from. But knowing about those religions brings curiosity, which in turn leads to scholarly pursuits such as religious studies, and ultimately to the wild step of learning from those traditions too. A very important book, a manifesto for a brand of scholarship that many find interesting but few are qualified to do. I intend to be one of those few.

"Going deep in Christ cannot mean going blind. ... Neither words nor the Word should blind us to the living realities that stand before us when we open our eyes. Christ crosses the boundaries of difference, but this crossing means more if we are actually seeing all these real and holy differences that will not disappear in this millennium either. It is rooted in Christ that we traverse the boundaries of Jew and Greek, male and female, slave and free, divine and human. It is in Christ that we encounter Laksmi in Her temple, read out way into the presence of the beautiful Devi, stand with Mary at the cross or in the desert, walk with Sojourner Truth into uncharted freedom." (105)

Enjoyed reading your thoughts here on Clooney's book -especially the last paragraph. I agree wholeheartedly with the statement that "Going deep in Christ cannot mean going blind" and about Christ crossing boundaries. I always figured people who put blinders on did so simply because they were not secure in their own faith. Was this a book you had to read for school? Your biblical-themed thread here is an education in itself.

Avidmom - it kinda is and kinda isn't. If I get a research paper for class I tend to use it as an excuse to read books on my shelf that are tangentially related to the paper topic. I'm doing on a research paper on perceptions of other religions in the Bible.

Your review was particularly interesting to me having recently read, as you know, both Silence and Deep River by Shusaku Endo, the first exploring Jesuit missionaries to Japan in the 17th century and the second exploring the encounter of Japanese tourists of varying backgrounds as well as one Japanese Catholic priest, with Hinduism. It helps me understand a little of Endo's perspective as a Japanese Catholic.

> 195

The first major Jesuit evangelist in Japan was Francis Xavier. But I don't think he was the kind of careful enculturator as Nobili in India or Ricci in China. My History of the Jesuits class is covering the missions this week, so I'll have more on this in a few days.

Some books I have set aside for reading on the Jesuit missions:
The Memory Palace of Matteo Ricci, Jonathan D. Spence
On Friendship: One Hundred Maxims for a Chinese Prince, Matteo Ricci
The True Meaning of the Lord of Heaven, Matteo Ricci
Journey to the East: The Jesuit Mission to China, 1579-1724, Liam Matthew Brockey
I have some more coming in the mail too, lol.

Always interesting here. Enjoyed your review on Clooney and comparative religion.

Really thoughtful review of Clooney's book -- you bring all of us interesting insights from your broad readings.

Thanks Dan and Jane!

The Art of Discernment: Making Good Decisions in Your World of Choices by Stefan Kiechle
Finished 10/1/12

Kiechle's little book provides a basic introduction to Ignatian discernment. I read this for my class on the history and spirituality of the Jesuits. Being a primary source stickler, I would have preferred the real deal (Ignatius' Spiritual Exercises), but this was worth reading too.

Ignatian spirituality was and is quite surprising as Catholic spiritualities go. When the Jesuits began as an order, they were one of the first of the orders to be neither monastic like the Benedictines nor mendicant like the Dominicans. They were completely out in the world, not even obligated to recite the liturgy of the hours in common. Even more, Ignatian spirituality sees God's will as divulged in the depths of our conscience. Our deepest desires, once we move past the ego needs that clog our minds, are God's deepest desires.

Ignatius proposed a very definite formula for decision-making. And decision-making is an important thing in the life of a Jesuit, who is out in the world and has all the worldly choices a cloistered Trappist does not. One part of Ignatius' method is the use of imagination. He counsels his discerner to imagine themselves on their deathbed. Looking back at that point, what decision would they have been more happy making?

Overall Kiechle's book is a short, valuable read, if a bit too fluffy for some. He makes the fruits of Catholic spirituality available for all. Even atheists could learn from Ignatius.

Embracing Obscurity: Becoming Nothing in Light of God's Everything by Anonymous Anonymous
Finished 10/3/12

This book, which I received as part of the Early Reviewers program, was an entertaining look at how ego and pride can so subtly seep into our desire to set the word on fire for God. Are we evangelizing for Christ or for ourselves?

Anonymous, who is practicing what (s)he preaches by taking no fame from this book, begins with a bliunt fact: 99.9% of us are obscure. We are known to a few hundred people in the world. For all the renown we get in our time, place, or subculture, there is a greater human family who has never heard of us. So why is it so hard to internalize this obscurity and live it in humility?

Anon structures her book by reviewing various pitfalls, such as success, and reversing the definitions for Christ. So what is success? In the world's eyes, success is money, fame, reputation. But God sees through these things. Success to God may be a quiet life lived in service to Him with no honor.

Anon raises some good points. For example, she points out the "Joseph Principle" that many Christians adopt: the more in the dumps you are now, the grander God's plan will be for you later. This is a way of looking at suffering that blocks one from truly taking up their cross in love, instead focusing only on the personal gain that actually may not come later.

Two questions stay in my mind:

What's your subtitle? What is the important tagline that you want people to remember about you? Was it that you were not attention-seeking but communicated love modestly, or that you are a CEO, a partner in a law form, a professor at the seinary?

Is your life mysterious? Do others find you crazy, like the promising football player who left that career for ministry?

An easy read but often thought-provoking, if a little thin in scholarship and references. The author seemed very unaware of current research on scripture, as she naively referred to the psalms as "David's." But that's my only real complaint!

Two more very interesting books and reviews! Looking back at that point, what decision would they have been more happy making? That's good advice for everybody, IMO.

'Twas definitely a good week for spiritual reading, Ms. Mom. I'm also currently working through Wherever You Go, There You Are by Jon Kabat-Zinn. It's a book about mindfulness meditation, quoting Thoreau a lot. I'm also hoping to read St. Therese of Lisieux's Story of a Soul this month in honor of her feast day on October 1.

Two more interesting books coming! YAY! I'm not Catholic (although I suspect my French ancestors were as great, great grandfather was "Francois Xavier" - named after the missionary maybe?) and don't know who Therese of Lisieux is but am looking forward to finding out about her. Story of a Soul gets high marks here on LT.

Ms. Mom That's funny. Just don't call me "ma'am." ;)

I have to call you Ms. Mom because I don't know your real name. LOL!

I really don't see any reason why Catholic saints can't be venerated in other traditions. So of course you can appreciate Therese of Lisieux.

The goodness of certain Saints can be appreciated by anyone who appreciates good people. It shouldn't have to be merely a Catholic thing.

201> "They also serve who only stand and wait...." (not that Milton ever stood and waited ;-} )

You are providing an education for me with your reviews -- thanks.

Just echoing that of #208 rebeccanyc. I very much enjoy your thoughts on your books - Thank you!

#200 - I would love to read a review of yours on Ignatius's own work...

Hi everyone! I've been so bad on LT. School is nuts. I'm trying to get my fun reading in but the reviews come late.

Wherever You Go There You Are: Mindfulness Meditation in Everyday Life by Jon Kabat-Zinn
Finished 10/7/12

Kabat-Zinn is famous for his "Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction" program, taught to medical doctors and therapists around the nation. Yet it is in fact a Westernized form of meditation, the same kind of mindfulness practice that he draws the reader into in this deep book. Kabat-Zinn communicates mindfulness as an ordinary, everyday practice that is also a deeply transformative way of being in the world. The book consists of very short chapters, designed to be read and digested easily. That makes it easy to put into practice. It was a slow read just to internalize the contents.

This book is full of gems, such as the practice of imagining oneself as a strong, focused, grounded mountain or a flexible, flowing river. As someone who has a hard time establishing daily practice, his point that no-practice is still a form of practice (because we're always practicing!) was very cogent. Definitely worth reading.

For some reason I think I own that book, but it isn't in my LT library. I have never been able to meditate, but I have always thought it would help me! I'll have to go look for it.

his point that no-practice is still a form of practice (because we're always practicing!) was very cogent.
Well, now, that makes me feel better!

Sounds like a valuable read.

I have the Kabat-Zinn on my shelf (along with a couple of other mindfulness books). I've started it several times, but I find it needs to read in short bits. Your review has inspired me to take it up again in the future.

A few years ago a counselor introduced me to mindfulness as well as some wonderful guided meditations by Thich Nhat Hanh.

Continued this bustling thread on a new page... hope you loyal readers will join!