I don’t think that Cain and Abel being the “symbol story of the human soul” is dependent upon every family experiencing the jealousy and competition of sibling rivalry (because obviously some don’t). I think the focus is the powerful human need for love and approval, the confusion and sorrow felt when we don’t get the love we believe we’ve earned, and the response to that rejection, be it gracious or vengeful. That part of the Cain and Abel story seems pretty universal to me.
In answer to the other question above, of course all the siblings in the book do not act out the rivalry drama – the Hamilton sibling relationships stand in contrast to the Trask sibling relationships. We don’t spend as much time with the Hamiltons as we do with the Trasks. Will appears periodically as kind of the Hamilton outlier. He doesn’t “get” his siblings, but he loves them. The Tom-Dessie tragedy seems almost like a short story dropped into the book, in that their fates don’t directly affect the overall movement of the plot.
About Tom: He is the one that Samuel thought might achieve greatness: “None of my children will be great either, except perhaps Tom. He’s suffering over the choosing right now. It’s a painful thing to watch” (p. 262). Instead, Tom’s life goes in entirely the other direction. Why do you think that is? Was there a specific turning point (well before his suicide) where he could have made other choices, but did not?
Just wanted to let you guys know that I have to go back in the hospital briefly. Hopefully I will still be able to post successfully from my phone.
When it comes to the choice of the next book, I am a strong proponent of the Underground RR/Underground Airlines duo we had discussed before. I am now reading Underground Railroad and it is excellent.
Also still interested in The Gloaming by Melanie Flynn.
I didn’t love the book, but I found it an interesting read. Lots that I really liked about it and lots that I found incredibly irritating.
Things I liked:
The whole discussion of the meaning of the Cain and Abel story. It has never occurred to me that it would be obvious to the early Jews that it was better to be a herder than a farmer and to sacrifice an animal over farmed stuff. I always think of settling down and become a farmer as more civilized and therefore more desirable. I also loved the question of translation and how that could have influenced different sects of Christianity.
The scene where Lee tells Adam he’d like to be allowed to leave to open a bookstore.
I love that little not about Adam knocking over his cup - such a little detail.
Then there’s just the weird stuff - chapter 14 [I remember clearly the deaths of three men. One was the richest man of the centruy, who having clawed his way to wealth through the souls and bodies of men, spent many years trying to buy back the love he had forfeited and by that process performed great service to the world and, perhaps, had much more than balanced the evil of his rise… Then there was a man … [who] clothed his motives in the name of virtue… There was a third man, who perhaps made many errors in performance but whose effective life was devoted to making men brave and dignifed and good in a time when they were poor and frightened…
[/quote]
Any guesses who they might be? I thought Andrew Carnegie for man number one.
And I love his description of the seduction of war in Chapter 42.
I cheated and found the answer–that is, if the Internet can be believed. Although I didn’t find the original source, a couple of different web sites claim that though the men are essentially archetypes, Steinbeck identified his inspiration for the three as John D. Rockefeller, William Randolph Hearst and Franklin Delano Roosevelt.
We could probably discuss a classic like East of Eden ad infinitum, but it’s December 10th and I know we’ve all got things to do, places to go, people to see, and presents to wrap.
Special thanks this round to @ignatius for essentially transcribing John Steinbeck’s letters for us. Those were an invaluable addition to the discussion. I now have a far greater appreciation for the man and his work than I did when I was 19.
We can go ahead and think about February’s selection. The Underground Railroad, part of the duo that @NJTheatreMOM proposed in post #141, has made several “Best of 2016” lists. Both The Underground Railroad and Underground Airlines made NPR’s top 10 list:
If you think the above is a plug for us taking on this duo, you’re right. It’s mighty tempting to kill two thematically related, well-reviewed, award-winning, best of 2016 books with one blow. But do we have the time and the inclination? Let me know what you think. We can also go in a completely different direction. Like @ignatius, I’m easy.
I’m game but in the spirit of more titles NPR just posted their Best Books of 2016 app and it’s so much fun to play with that we should add another title or two for consideration.
Honestly, even though I still want to read the Camus duo - I’m feeling in light of current politics the Underground duo is timely.
There was a good article about Colson Whitehead in Harvard Magazine recently. It made me want to read the book more than reviews or the excerpt in the New York Times did.
Not necessarily a recommendation for this group, but I saw Jo Walton’s Necessity in the sci fi/fantasy section of the NPR’s recommendations. I read the first of this trilogy (The Just City) and loved the premise - two Greek Gods make a bet about creating a perfect society and pluck Socrates and others out of time and put them together on an island. What happens?
I hadn’t realized there were more books the series though the first one definitely had a to be continued sort of ending.
Hopefully I will still be able to post successfully from my phone.