Author: 459856pwpadmin

Whereas the last book was something I read compulsively, but did not always ENJOY reading, The Death of a Beekeeper was completely the opposite.  It seems surprising that this novel could be so entrancing, so personal, so involving, but something must have appealed to me because I did, after all, buy it.  And this one definitely goes on the permanent shelf.

Beautiful, spare, utterly captivating.  I absolutely loved reading this book and the only reason it took me two days was because I had to keep stopping to consider what I was reading, to let my mind wander through this new world that was being created by words, and occasionally to doze off into the world of dreams (decongestants).  Gustafson’s prose and power of description are wonderful.   The story is not really a story in the traditional sense, it purports to be the miscellaneous journals found in the house of a man who has died of cancer, the journals of a man dying of cancer.  But the writing draws one in to this world and makes the reader feel the world, as if these could be his or her journals (if most of us could write this well) and we feel these thoughts, this world, and the slipping away of this world very deeply. Rather than reading a story about someone else in someplace else in order to escape one’s self for a bit, the reader becomes the narrator, at least in part, and this becomes as much the reader’s story and the reader’s loss as that of some imagined character. One reads and begins to feel the events and thoughts as if one was a part of them, as if one’s own memories are being created.

A tremendous accomplishment.

It is time once again to fit the newly read books onto the bookshelves, always a challenge here as we by no means live in a book-free zone.

In doing so I have been faced with a bit of a  conundrum.  The books I think I want to save are stacked neatly, ready to be interfiled with their future shelf-mates and I find I must pause.  What do I do with the book I just read, The Tortilla Curtain.  As you recall, I said it was worthwhile reading, and the writing was good.  In fact it was a rather namby-pamby review because I didn’t really say what I thought about the story itself, except that it made me think about myself and society in a different way.  And herein lies the problem.

The book was good.  I do not regret reading it, in fact I am probably even glad I did.  Initially I put it on the "to be saved" list, but now I have doubts.  Is this the kind of book I really want on my shelf?  I don’t save books because they are uplifting.  I even have been known to save books I don’t agree with but which make me think and look at the world in different ways.  This book might meet that criteria, as it has made me look at myself and my society and the ways our lives and our values are often in conflict.  But it is also a novel, and it is a novel in which one character, Delaney, runs down another character, Candido, gives him $20.00 in payment for the severe injuries he has incurred, and then later feels he (Delaney) has been "taken" by the Mexican, whom he later tries to kill.  In many ways I find Delaney to be despicable, even though I can understand how his view of life has turned down the path to destruction.  Is this a book I will ever read again?  Is this a book I want my grandchildren to read?

Well, I think I have answered my question.

I finished The Tortilla Curtain.  It took me longer than most "bicycle books" do but then it is a novel that holds up well on its own, not just as a distraction while riding an exercise bike.  I hadn’t expected to like this book  as much as I did.  The only other Boyle novel I had read, World’s End, had not been a favorite despite much acclaim at the time.

Boyle is an excellent, skilled writer and the book is quite enjoyable to read.   Yes, it is a book about California, about the extremes of not just California but the American Lifestyle.  Yes, in many ways the characters are stereotypes of the poor immigrant and the rich, liberal, shallow, white American.  Yes both families experience a series of disasters that are unlikely to occur in such short order in "real life".  But Boyle does not get trapped in the assumptions and the stereotypes. Each of the primary characters, Delaney and Candido are given equal weight.  Neither one is treated as a stereotype and Boyle makes no effort to say "this is the typical member of his tribe".  I would get completely wrapped up in the lives of the characters even though I might find them each quite unlikeable at times.

As I said, these characters are not stereotypes.  They are individuals, but there must be many people like them in many degrees and variations.  Each character rings true, and I can see the basic traits that I see in other people, and myself in each of them.  Each of them reacts in ways that seem completely in keeping with what we have learned of their characters and their lives.  While the book highlights the dichotomy of rich and poor in this nation, quite brutally at times, Boyle does not belittle either side. I don’t think the point of the book is to damn or praise anything in American Culture.  It is about miscommunication and what happens when people come up against a wall, what assumptions they make and how they react and how our circumstances and background affect the judgments we make about other people. 

Yes the book is unrealistic in many ways, but a good novel often has to be unrealistic.  Tragedy, Comedy, The Unexpected.  These are what highlight the experiences of life and a good novel must draw our attentions to things that we might miss in the normal boring day-to-day flow of life (Anne Tyler excepted perhaps).  Delaney may be shallow and self-righteous.  Candido may be ignorant and even "hopeless" at times.  But their reactions ring true on many levels.  But the book is about how people react under extreme circumstances  and about how different our expectations and judgments are, about how difficult it really is for people to understand and judge others whose upbringing, language, and circumstances are quite different. "Walking a mile in another person’s shoes" does not come naturally to any of us.

It is a good book.  The story is gripping.  The characters are very clearly drawn and the reader is drawn into their thoughts.   The book is sympathetic even as it is damning.  In short it is about our humanity and how we perceive the world around us, strengths and shortcomings and all.  The novel doesn’t really seem to judge, but the reader might find herself thinking much.  In keeping with the theme of the novel, different readers may bring in different perceptions as well, adding more or less weight.  I might damn Delaney more than Candido, because I can relate more to Delaney’s background than to Candido’s.  Even though I might despise some of his decisions, I feel angry at him, I feel that he, with his privileges and better education, should have known better.  But that is the point.  We are all prisoners of our backgrounds and in extreme circumstances it is our backgrounds that determine our biases and how we react, now matter how much we might try to overcome these assumptions at other times in our lives.

Individually we are doomed to misunderstanding.  But there is still humanity and there is still a shred of hope.