Reading

I really enjoyed reading this book. It was a very interesting story: what happens to a man who is utterly, debatably to a nonsensical degree, honest? A man who is aloof, both from his own emotions and from the world in front of him. The story of Arthur Meursault exposes some of the absurdity of life. His trial, in particular, is a poignant display of society’s departure from reason: rarely does he even speak in his own trial, and he is sent to the guillotine merely for not weeping at his mother’s funeral. Here, we see the judges, the lawyers, and the jury clinging so vehemently to abstract ideals like justice, sentimentality, and decorum, yet they forget to be rational. Yet, while what I am saying may lead you to think of this story as Kafkaesque, I would argue that it is not. This story is human, it is real. There are no magically disappearing doors and enigmatic authorities claiming one thing on one day and another completely different thing the next.

My critique, however, is not with the writing of this novel (I loved Camus’ style, and I give this work high praise in terms of literary prowess). Rather, I completely disagree with Camus’ message, that is, that life is meaningless and there is no God. The Stranger is the epitome of atheist existentialism, a philosophy which I believe is faulty to its core. While I was deeply intellectually stimulated and entertained by this book, I was not convinced by its conclusion.

I cannot help but compare this to 1984. The two are similar, and I can see that Orwell drew inspiration from this novel. Yet, they are very different at their core. Brave New World asks us what true happiness is. If society deems it civil and moral, is a life of indulgence, vice, and pleasure better than one of faith, virtue, and delayed gratification? This is a great question to ponder in today’s world of quick pleasures.

I enjoyed the pace of this book; it was a fun read, driven by a good mix of plot, character development, and dialogue. Huxley’s dystopian world seems to be different than other dystopias: secret police, torture, and instant execution are not practices in this totalitarian government. Rather than controlling civilization through these measures, the government in Brave New World does so through pleasure, the destruction of the family, controlled births, and conditioning. Dissenters in this society are not simply murdered. Rather, they are sent away or even taken in as high-ranking, free-thinking officials (in the case of Mustapha Mond).

I didn’t rank this higher because some of the characters didn’t quite make sense to me. John, the Savage, took a sharp turn at the end of the novel. Perhaps as a protest against civilization, he started living alone in intentional suffering, whipping himself viciously. I believe that this was a product of his lifelong loneliness, first as an outcast on the reservation and second as an outcast in civilization. If this is the case, I wish that Huxley had touched on this internal turmoil more. Note that I am being very critical here. This was a great book that has left me with a lot to think about. I enjoyed it as I read, and I’m very glad I read it.

This is a very different rating from my other books. I wasn’t enthralled by this book. Rather, this was a very helpful and insightful book. It helped me understand Christianity a good deal more. Lewis’s arguments weren’t air-tight, so I treated this book more as a taster (and that was its intention). This book was originally spoken on the radio before it was put into text, thus the free-flowing, less pedantic tone. This explains his argument style better. Rather than getting deep into the weeds of theology and persuasion, Lewis only scrapes the surface. Regardless, this was a good read. I would recommend this to any Christian or anyone interested in Christianity.

Dostoevsky has an incredible way of conveying the innermost depths of the human mind. His work in The Double is no exception. The Double was a psychological and disorienting novel, and its scope was quite narrow, focusing solely on the main character, Yakov Petrovich Goliadkin. This book was reminiscent of Franz Kafka’s The Trial. Overall, this was a solid book with very interesting writing. It wasn’t quite gripping, I’d say, both in plot and character development. That being said, this book does not lack depth.

I didn’t rank this higher than a 7/10 because it didn’t draw me in. It wasn’t as thought-provoking as other recent reads, like my recent Tolstoys, and I wasn’t able to learn much about other characters. I learned a ton about Goliadkin’s mind, and he did gradually change, but his arc was not that impactful to me. The “arc” wasn’t that much curved, if you will. This was more of a study on Goliadkin than an observance of change: we eventually discover who he his as we venture to the depths of his mind.

This is the story of a man who slowly endures an enigmatic illness that eventually ends his life. His body and mind decay while he suffers in the darkness of his bedroom. Ivan Ilyich lived a life of status and decorum but never one of fulfillment. He is jaded and embittered with regret, misdirected purpose, and hatred both for himself and for those around him. His doctors, wife, children, colleagues, and friends all lie to him, all avoiding the fact that this disease will inevitably kill him. They choose decorum over honesty and true human connection. Gerasim, the servant boy, however, is the only person truly honest with Ilyich. He treats him with simple, honest compassion and frankly addresses Ilyich about his coming death. His presence shows that love, truth, and human warmth are more real and life-affirming than status or intellectual detachment.

It is not until the last page of this novella that Ilyich finds redemption: he departs from his hatred and sullenness and, in his last words, seeks forgiveness from his family. He sees that the hatred he has for everyone around him is simply the hatred he has for himself and his own life. Not until realizing this did Ilyich’s heart become filled with love and humility.

This is a story about the fragility of life, the lies of status and social norms, the search for meaning and fulfillment, isolation, human connection, and the redemptive power of love and selflessness. Tolstoy impressively puts the reader into the heart of Ivan Ilyich. Reading this, I suffered with him, and his final transformation felt like a transformation of my own heart.

The beginning of this book was slow. There were a lot of characters to introduce, and Hat Creek’s journey to Montana was slow to pick up. As I kept reading, though, the story got better and better. This happened in two ways. First, the scope of their journey increased. As they traveled on, they saw new, beautiful territory, had more action-packed encounters, and their fear of an Indian attack against them grew. Second, and more importantly, the characters and their relationships developed as the story went on, giving me a better view into their hearts. A complaint I had of this book was its lack of emotional and philosophical depth, but the last portion of the book washed that away.

This book did a great job of capturing my imagination. It placed me on a horse, riding next to Gus and Call, with a revolver on my hip. As I rode, I traveled through the dry Texas desert, through the grassy plains of Kansas and Nebraska, through the cold desert of Wyoming, and finally to the snowy, beautiful plains and mountains of Montana. This book was a window into the American West and the culture of the cowboy.

Call’s refusal to accept Newt as his son was the most thought-provoking and emotionally impactful part of this book. This was a focal point in the last few chapters, but I wish that it had been touched on more throughout the book. The female characters, Clara and Lorena (and Elmira), are extremely important. Through each of them and their various suitors, McMurtry reveals the multifaceted nature of love and points to a man’s poignant longing for a woman.

I’m very pleased with the ending of this book. In the last few chapters, I was filled with this hope that Call would finally accept Newt as his son. Even after he set off to go back to Texas to bury Gus, I was hoping that Newt would chase after him. Yet, this never happened. The book ends with this quiet, cold burn. I was hoping for Call’s redemption, but that never happened. This left me with a lot to think about.

Some important themes: justice, masculinity, the fragility of life, adventure, friendship, pride and sin, (distorted) love, motherhood and fatherhood, discipline vs. gratification (Call vs. Gus).

Last note: this is the longest book I have ever read. I read it at a lightning pace, averaging around 30,000 words per day. This should be a testament to how drawn I was to this story.