Book Review: Mozart’s Sister

Mozart's Sister Mozart’s Sister by Nancy Moser tells the story of Maria Anna Mozart, known as Nannerl, Mozart’s older sister by four and a half years. The two of them were the only surviving children of seven, the other five having died in infancy. When their father started giving Nannerl lessons on the harpsichord, Wolfgang, then three, wanted to learn, too, to be like his sister. He picked it up quickly, as well as other instruments, and was composing by age five, completing his first symphony by age eight. Their father took them on tours from their native Salzburg to various royal courts and other venues in European cities like Munich, Vienna, Paris, London, Zurich, and others as the Wunderkind – Miracle Children. Their father, Leopold, even lied about their ages, making them out to be even younger than they were so as to play up the “Wunder” even more. Nannerl received top billing at first and was well-known for her playing, but “Wolfie” seemed even more a prodigy, being so much younger, and eventually most of the attention went to him.

Leopold was a composer, violinist, teacher, and finally the assistant director of music (Kapellmeister) for the archbishop of Salzburg. He eventually laid aside his own composing and performing and poured himself into promoting the children’s talent, then just Wolfie’s, then seeking out a position for Wolfgang. They made money on the tours, but Leopold was only paid for his position when he was actually there is Salzberg, understandably, and he almost lost his position due to so much time away. Thus there was always a tension between what they wanted to do and the need for finances.

The story is told from Nannerl’s point of view and begins with the various experiences with travels and concerts, delighting to play, interactions with royalty, expectations to play dressed up as little adults with adult-looking clothing and massive powdered wigs. Both she and Wolfie became seriously ill with smallpox, and once he had rheumatic fever.

Their parents encouraged Wolfie’s composing but discouraged Nannerl’s on the grounds that it was hard enough for men to get music accepted and published; for women it was considered impossible. Wolfie was groomed for a musical career but Nannerl was expected to lay all of that aside to marry and bear children. When she was of marriageable age,  Leopold and Wolfgang went on tours together, leaving the women behind.

When Nannerl fell in love, she was not allowed to marry the man of her choosing, but there’s no evidence to explain why. Some sources, according to Wikipedia, think Leopold did not allow it. Nancy portrays it as the archbishop, who employed Nannerl’s intended and from whom they had to receive permission, denying it as part of his adversarial relationship with Leopold. Whatever the reason, the two remained close friends.

Wolfgang, though a genius musically, seemed egocentric, lacking in common sense, and unwise in money matters. The author played up the tension she thought Nannerl felt as the dutiful, obedient daughter whose life did not turn out as she wanted it to, even though she did everything “right,” as opposed to Wolfie, who was irresponsible and self-willed, yet seemed to get everything he wanted, including marrying the girl his father did not at first approve of. Yet, whereas a number of modern people seem to leave it as “poor, Nannerl, born in the wrong time period and kept down by the oppressive customs of the times,” from the brief bit of reading I have done online since finishing the book, Nancy portrays her as having to wrestle through all those disappointments while maintaining her love for family and coming to a place of acceptance and even finding her own place of worth, even though it was not what she originally planned.

A few quotes:

To Papa, getting Wolfie back in Salzburg, safely ensconced in a salaried position, would save our family’s finances. I couldn’t see that he was wrong in this, but I knew keeping Wolfie in such a position would be like trying to cage a hummingbird.

Having no musical challenge—as was the case in Salzburg—sapped his life breath and made him suffocate for lack of creative air.

If only Wolfie didn’t have to think about money but could concentrate on creating and performing for the sheer joy of it. If only we all could do what we wanted to do.

Wolfie had to adapt the music to the limitations and egos of the singers, which was both frustrating and time-consuming.

“Will that boy ever understand the world does not revolve around him?” I did not mention Papa’s part in creating that belief.

A few small criticisms:

At the end the author has an extended list of what was fact, based on historical records and family letters, and what was fiction based on the best information she had. A lot of Nannerl’s inward wrestlings were based on what the author would have felt in her position or what she “felt sure” Nannerl felt, but I think she may have overdone it a bit. Nannerl seemed a bit whiny at times in the first half of the book.

The use of modern phrases – like “hard for me to wrap my mind around” something, “It seemed that Wolfie was settling,” “purple prose” – seemed jarringly out of place in a historical context.

“All musicians feel this bond with the Divine.” I wasn’t sure how that was meant. Feeling God working in and through them – that’s fine and I can understand that. But if it’s meant to convey a “spark of Divinity” in the individual, I would disagree. I think from what I have read of the author that she would mean the former, but the statement was vague enough to make one wonder.

Otherwise, I very much enjoyed learning about the Mozarts and appreciated the author’s encouragement to “Take Nannerl’s story as an impetus to look at your own life and make it the most it can be. You too have a unique, God-given purpose. The trick is to find out what it is.”

(Sharing with Semicolon‘s Saturday Review of Books, Carol’s Books You Loved)

Book Review: 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea

20,000 LeaguesJules Verne’s 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea opens in 1866 when reports come in front various countries of sightings of…something in various waters, giving rise to assorted speculations. It is described as “a long object, spindle-shaped, occasionally phosphorescent, and infinitely larger and more rapid in its movements than a whale.” In a couple of instances it damaged nearby vessels, leaving a large hole in one ship. These kinds of accidents and the unexplained disappearance of several ships lead to the general sentiment that the creature must be found and destroyed. An expedition is arranged from New York aboard the Abraham Lincoln, and Pierre Aronnax of France, Professor of Natural History at the Museum of Paris and author of Mysteries of the Great Submarine Grounds, is currently in NY and invited to come along. He accepts, along with his servant, Conseil.

After a number of days of searching, they do encounter the creature. Ned Land, a Canadian expert harpooner, had also been invited on this expedition, and when he tries to harpoon the thing, his harpoon bounces off. The thing then sprays an enormous amount of water at the ship, causing, among other things, Professor Aronnax to fall into the depths.

His faithful servant Conseil goes in after him, and they find Ned Land on top of something solid – and metallic. The Abraham Lincoln’s rudder has been broken, so they can’t count on it to come after them. When whatever they are on starts to submerge, they pound on the outside. A hatch opens, and they are taken in.

After a couple of days locked in a dark room, visited by a couple of men who at first seem not to understand them, finally the master of the vessel, a Captain Nemo, introduces himself, tells them they are at liberty to roam the vessel, but he cannot let them go, and furthermore, there would be times when he asked them to remain in their cabins until they received notice they could leave again. He had “broken all the ties of humanity,” and was “done with society entirely, for reasons which I alone have the right of appreciating. I do not, therefore, obey its laws, and I desire you never to allude to them before me again!” They had no choice but to accept.

The professor finds plenty to occupy himself. Nemo takes him on a tour of his ship, the Nautilus, explains how it is fueled, how he built it, etc. A window opens up sometimes to show the surroundings, and Aronnax is excited to observe, record, even to go on some underwater excursions and explore. Conseil is happy to be wherever his master is, but Ned Land chafes at the confinement.

At times Nemo comes across as intelligent, gracious, refined, and generous. But there are other times he seems a little unhinged. When a crisis occurs, the three visitors become convinced they need to leave. But how can they?

My thoughts:

I never knew much about this book besides being familiar with the names of Nemo and the Nautilus, and the round copper helmets of their diving suits seemed to be a staple of underwater sci-fi when I was growing up. So it was interesting to finally learn the story. There were just a couple of places where it got tedious, when measurements or  long citations of plants and animals seen were listed. But there was also plenty of drama and suspense.

I bought the audiobook on sale some time ago and I had forgotten that, when reading a book that has been translated from the original, it’s good to get some information on which translation is considered the best. According to Wikipedia, the first English translation by Lewis Mercier “cut nearly a quarter of Verne’s original text and made hundreds of translation errors, sometimes dramatically changing the meaning of Verne’s original intent.” The description doesn’t say what translation this is, but the comments indicate this is not one of the better ones. So if I ever read it again, I’ll seek out another, but I did enjoy the story.

I was amazed at the misconceptions about it, though. For one, some list it as juvenile fiction, though it was not written that way. Schmoop attributes that to some of the poor translations and its having been made into a Disney movie. One source said it was about Nemo seeking revenge on a sea creature, but that’s one incident in the book and not the main plot at all.

Other interesting facts: The 20,000 leagues in the title refers to distance traveled, not depths plumbed. A little more of Nemo’s background is revealed in a later Verne book, The Mysterious Island. Verne’s publisher made several changes to the book (it wasn’t indicated whether this was with or without Verne’s approval), like changing Nemo’s nationality.

I’m thankful to the Back to the Classics challenge for spurring me to read a book I might not otherwise have picked up.

(Sharing with Semicolon‘s Saturday Review of Books, Literary Musing Monday, Carol’s Books You Loved)

Book Review: Conscience: What It Is, How To Train It, and Loving Those Who Differ

Conscience  Conscience: What It Is, How To Train It, and Loving Those Who Differ by Andrew David Naselli and J. D. Crowley is a fairly short book at 149 pages (not including indexes), but it’s packed full.

They begin with a brief explanation about what got each of them thinking and then studying about the conscience. Then they explore what the conscience is and does and look briefly at every verse in the New Testament that mentions conscience. They bring out several principles, more than I can reiterate here, but a few stand out: conscience has been given to us by God; no two people have exactly the same conscience; “no one’s conscience perfectly matches God’s will”; conscience can be damaged in a number of ways; we should listen to it and not violate it so that we don’t damage it; once God shows us clearly that an issue our conscience troubles us about is not an issue in God’s Word, we yield to God as Lord over our consciences (e.g., Peter submitting to God’s rule about eating certain kinds of meat even though at first his conscience condemned them as unclean in Acts 10).

Our consciences might misregister due to being “hardened by the deceitfulness of sin.” – if we keep doing something that we feel is wrong and ignore conscience. “Feeding excuses to your conscience is like feeding sleeping pills to a watchdog” (p. 64). Our consciences are also affected by “the standards of other people such as your culture, family, or spiritual leaders. You simply go with the flow without thinking through the issues” (p. 64).

Since Christians are (or should be) continually reading God’s Word and growing spiritually, our consciences will change over the years as we realize some scruples are not Biblically based and as we become convicted of some issues that we had not previously realized were sin. We continually calibrate our consciences to align with God’s Word.

But since we’re all in different stages of growth and come from different cultures and have been taught different things about right and wrong, all our consciences are not going to be on the same page at the same time. How then do we interact with each other?

We should not sin against our conscience by thinking, “Well, Mr. A and Miss B. do this and they are strong Christians, so it must be ok.” No, “Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind” (Romans 14:2), we should do everything we do as unto the Lord (Romans 14:6), and we shouldn’t do anything that we can’t do with the full faith that it is okay (Romans 14:22-23) (“Don’t forget that ‘faith’ here refers not to saving faith in Christ [14:22a makes that clear] but to the confidence a person has in their heart or conscience to do a particular activity” [p. 97]). One whose conscience is strong in a certain area shouldn’t despise someone whose conscience bothers them on that issue, and the person whose conscience bothers them shouldn’t judge the person whose conscience has no scruples about issues which are not clearly defined in Scripture (Romans 14:3-4). Bringing up a specific matter, the authors write:

Don’t roll your eyes. This question may make you “face palm” in amazement at how strange someone else’s conscience might be. That’s typically how someone with a strong conscience reacts when they hear about the scruples of the weak. But to the weak of conscience, these are life-and-death matters. Conscience is always a life-and-death matter since sinning against it is always a sin, and getting used to sinning against conscience in one area will make it easier to sin against conscience in other areas. The strong must not look down on the weak but bear with them (Romans 15:1) and, if opportunity arises, gently help them calibrate their conscience (p. 79).

A few of the many quotes I have marked:

We should expect disagreements with fellow Christians about third-level matters [disputable matters where the Bible allows for differences], and we should learn to live with those differences. Christians don’t always need to eliminate differences, but they should always seek to glorify God by loving each other in their differences (p. 87).

Mature Christians should help other Christians train their consciences, but no one should force others to change their conscience (p. 92).

Our ultimate goal is not simply to stop judging those who are free or to stop looking down on those who are strict. Our ultimate goal is to follow the example of our Lord Jesus, who gave up his rights for others. He joyfully renounced his unbelievable freedom in heaven to come to earth and become an obedient Jew in order to save his people (Rom. 15:3-9) (pp. 95-96).

Have the right proportion. Keep disputable matters in their place as third-level issues. Don’t treat them like first- or second-level issues. And don’t become preoccupied with them or divisive about them. They shouldn’t be so important to you that it’s all you want to talk about. They shouldn’t be the main reason that you choose what church to join. They shouldn’t be issues that you are the most passionate about such that you are constantly trying to win people over to your position and then looking down on them if they decide not to join your side (p. 101).

Unfortunately I have seen this far too often. We spend a disproportionate amount of time on these issues, and let them distract us from the main issues.

Notice how generous Paul is to both sides. He assumes that both sides are exercising their freedoms or restrictions for the glory of God. Wouldn’t it be amazing to be in a church where everyone gave each other the benefit of the doubt on these differences, instead of putting the worst possible spin on everything? Paul says that both the weak and the strong can please the Lord even while holding different views on disputable matters. They have different positions but the same motivation: to honor God. They both do what they do for the glory of God (p. 106).

Christ gave up his life for that brother or sister; are you unwilling to give up your freedom [to do something your conscience is free about] if that would help your fellow believer avoid sinning against conscience? That’s what this passage is talking about when it refers to putting “a stumblingblock or hindrance” (Rom. 14:13) in another’s way (p. 109).

Christian freedom is not “I always do what I want.” Nor is it “I always do whatever the other person wants.” It is “I do what brings glory to God. I do what brings others under the influence of the gospel. I do what leads to peace in the church (p. 115).

One of the authors is a missionary to Cambodia, and they discuss dealing with cross-cultural issues of conscience as well. For instance, the author had a fledgling mango tree that finally produced three pieces of fruit. A friend doing some concrete work at his house ate the fruit. In the US, we’d consider that at least thoughtless and selfish, at worst, thievery. But in that culture, eating fruit while on or passing through someone else’s property was not a problem at all (there is even Biblical precedent for that in Deut. 23:24-25 and Luke 6:1). Reacting negatively to that would be seen as stingy. Preaching against it as “sin” would have either confused the hearers or caused them to dismiss the missionary’s message. They cite another case in another country where the people had no qualms about a women’s chest being uncovered, as they associated breasts with feeding babies, but to them “the sight of a woman’s thighs stimulates lustful desires” (p. 125). So a lady missionary thought the bare-chested women were highly immodest, but they thought she was immodest for wearing clothes that showed her thighs. The authors devote a whole chapter to dealing with these kinds of issues, pointing out especially that when we discuss sin, we need to major on what the Bible clearly says is sin, not sin in our cultural contexts, and we need to be careful that we’re not reproducing churches or Christians that mirror the culture that we came from, but rather we need to help them reflect Christ in their own culture.

There is so much more that I’d like to share, but I am in danger of reproducing the book as it is. Much of this was not new to me, as once when we moved to a different area and could not find a church “just” like the one we came from, I had to study through Romans 14 and related passages to come to terms with differences in preferences among the folks in our new area.  But this is a much more thorough exploration than mine had been. I appreciated not only the study but also the practicality, balance, and accessibility (easy to understand without a lot of theological-ese) of the book. Highly recommended.

(Sharing with Semicolon‘s Saturday Review of Books, Literary Musing Monday, Carol’s Books You Loved)

Reminder: Laura Ingalls Wilder Reading Challenge

Just a reminder that the Laura Ingalls Wilder Reading Challenge starts here a week from tomorrow on Feb. 1! More information and an extended book list is here (you don’t have to choose a book from the list: it’s just there for suggestions).

I’ll have a post here next Thursday where you can sign up to let us know you are participating and what you plan to read. I’m looking forward to seeing what your choices are!

Book Review: The Man Who Was Thursday

ThursdayIn The Man Who Was Thursday by G. K. Chesterton, Gabriel Syme and Lucian Gregory both profess to be poets, but they argue publicly about the nature of poetry and anarchy, Gregory leaning toward anarchy and Syme a “poet of law, a poet of order; nay, … a poet of respectability.” Privately Gregory confesses that he really is an anarchist, and to prove it, he wants to take Syme to a meeting of a council of anarchists. Seven men make up the council, each with a code name of a day of the week, led by Sunday. Thursday has just died and Gregory feels sure he will be elected to fill his place. He swears Syme to secrecy.

After further discussion and the codes necessary to get into the meeting, Syme asks Gregory in turn to swear not to tell a secret of his own. After Gregory agrees, Syme confesses that he is a detective with Scotland Yard.

Don’t you see we’ve checkmated each other? I can’t tell the police you are an anarchist. You can’t tell the anarchists I’m a policeman. I can only watch you, knowing what you are; you can only watch me, knowing what I am. In short, it’s a lonely, intellectual duel, my head against yours. I’m a policeman deprived of the help of the police. You, my poor fellow, are an anarchist deprived of the help of that law and organisation which is so essential to anarchy.

As Gregory makes his speech at the meeting, he fears saying anything that Syme can use against the organization, so he comes across as very tame. Syme stands up with rousing words that get the meeting behind him, and he is elected as Thursday.

Undercover, he meets with the council to determine their plans so he can thwart them. But when one of the council, an old, frail man, follows him after the meeting, Syme tries several tricks to evade him, only to find him continually following. When they finally confront each other, Syme is stunned to learn that this man is also an undercover detective. And that’s just the first step in his discovering that all is not as it appears.

My thoughts:

This book is quite suspenseful all the way through, and the latter part becomes allegorical. I had not known that going in: before choosing this book, as I tried to read enough about it to know whether I’d be interested, but not so much as to spoil it, I had missed this aspect. I’m struggling with that same line between revealing too much yet wanting to share more in reviewing it.

It gets pretty weird at the end, and I wasn’t sure what the allegory meant. As I sought some more insight this morning, I came across part of an article by Chesterton in which he lamented, “I have sometimes had occasion to murmur meekly that those who endure the heavy labour of reading a book might possibly endure that of reading the title-page of a book.”

It is odd that one example occurred in my own case… in a book called The Man Who Was Thursday. It was a very melodramatic sort of moonshine, but it had a kind of notion in it; and the point is that it described, first a band of the last champions of order fighting against what appeared to be a world of anarchy, and then the discovery that the mysterious master both of the anarchy and the order was the same sort of elemental elf who had appeared to be rather too like a pantomime ogre. This line of logic, or lunacy, led many to infer that this equivocal being was meant for a serious description of the Deity; and my work even enjoyed a temporary respect among those who like the Deity to be so described. But this error was entirely due to the fact that they had read the book but had not read the title page. In my case, it is true, it was a question of a subtitle rather than a title. The book was called The Man Who Was Thursday: A Nightmare. It was not intended to describe the real world as it was, or as I thought it was, even when my thoughts were considerably less settled than they are now. It was intended to describe the world of wild doubt and despair which the pessimists were generally describing at that date; with just a gleam of hope in some double meaning of the doubt, which even the pessimists felt in some fitful fashion.

So realizing that it’s an allegory and being reminded that it was a nightmare helped me comes to terms with thinking I was reading a crime drama only to encounter the increasing weirdness near the end. It is a crime drama, but it’s also fantasy and philosophy.

But realizing it is an allegory also opens more questions as to what it all means. The biggest question most people have, according to my reading, is just who exactly is Sunday and what does he represent? Even the characters “see” him in different ways.

“I suppose you are right,” said the Professor reflectively. “I suppose we might find it out from him; but I confess that I should feel a bit afraid of asking Sunday who he really is.”

“Why,” asked the Secretary, “for fear of bombs?”

“No,” said the Professor, “for fear he might tell me.”

My usual go-to sources for analysis of the classics, Schmoop and SparkNotes, don’t include this book, but this article says it’s meant to be a riddle, like Job, in that everything is not explained, but we’re assured God is in control, and this article asserts that it “revolves around two of the deepest of all theological mysteries: the freedom of the will and the existence of massive, irrational evil.” The latter also suggests a plausible identity for Sunday.

This was my first time reading Chesterton beyond an occasional witty quote, and his wit shines here, as in the irony of “law and organisation which is so essential to anarchy.” A few more examples:

If you didn’t seem to be hiding, nobody hunted you out.
___
His soul swayed in a vertigo of moral indecision.
___
“It cannot be as bad as you say,” said the Professor, somewhat shaken. “There are a good number of them certainly, but they may easily be ordinary tourists.”

“Do ordinary tourists,” asked Bull, with the fieldglasses to his eyes, “wear black masks half-way down the face?”
___
“My God!” said the Colonel, “someone has shot at us.”

“It need not interrupt conversation,” said the gloomy Ratcliffe. “Pray resume your remarks, Colonel. You were talking, I think, about the plain people of a peaceable French town.”

And the more philosophical:

This is a vast philosophic movement, consisting of an outer and an inner ring. You might even call the outer ring the laity and the inner ring the priesthood. I prefer to call the outer ring the innocent section, the inner ring the supremely guilty section.
___

But right up against these dreary colours rose the black bulk of the cathedral; and upon the top of the cathedral was a random splash and great stain of snow, still clinging as to an Alpine peak. It had fallen accidentally, but just so fallen as to half drape the dome from its very topmost point, and to pick out in perfect silver the great orb and the cross. When Syme saw it he suddenly straightened himself, and made with his sword-stick an involuntary salute.

He knew that that evil figure, his shadow, was creeping quickly or slowly behind him, and he did not care.

It seemed a symbol of human faith and valour that while the skies were darkening that high place of the earth was bright. The devils might have captured heaven, but they had not yet captured the cross.
___
Shall I tell you the secret of the whole world? It is that we have only known the back of the world. We see everything from behind, and it looks brutal. That is not a tree, but the back of a tree. That is not a cloud, but the back of a cloud. Cannot you see that everything is stooping and hiding a face? If we could only get round in front—

The second article I referred to has an interesting section on our only seeing “the back side” of things, tying it in with Moses seeing the “back” of God in Exodus 33:17-23.

I’m sorely tempted to go back and reread it now with the understanding of its allegorical nature and some of these insights. But I think I’ll wait. I saw reference in some of my research to an annotated edition which might be helpful. Meanwhile, I am glad to have read it and thankful to the Back to the Classics challenge for steering me towards books I might not otherwise have picked up. I found this book quite funny in places, especially in some of the dialogue, suspenseful throughout, and ultimately seriously thought-provoking. It’s a sign of a good book when it has you pondering it long after closing it.

(Sharing with Semicolon‘s Saturday Review of Books, Literary Musing Monday, Carol’s Books You Loved)

Book Review: Ghost Boy

Ghost BoyMartin Pistorius was a fairly normal boy living a fairly normal childhood in South Africa. But in 1988, at age 12, he came home from school with a sore throat. Over the next few days he lost interest in eating and only wanted to sleep. He ended up in a wheelchair, silent and unresponsive. The doctors explored psychological causes and then ran every physical test they could.

It took about a year for the doctors to confess that they had run out of treatment options. All they could say was that I was suffering from a degenerative neurological disorder, cause and prognosis unknown, and advise my parents to put me into an institution to let my illness run its course. Politely but firmly the medical profession washed its hands of me as my mother and father effectively were told to wait until my death released us all.

But at about age 16, he started “waking up,” or becoming aware, for short periods of time. By age 19, he was fully conscious. But he couldn’t let anyone know. He couldn’t speak, he couldn’t control his limbs. Even when he did begin to regain movement and could lift his head up and down and smile, people didn’t recognize that the movements or expressions were purposeful. So he was trapped in his body for six more years. At times he was frustrated and angry. Other times he used his imagination to escape into fantasy.

I resembled a potted plant: something to be given water and left in a corner.

He lived at home, but spent his days at a care center while both parents worked. One of his caregivers, who used to give him massages to work his stiff muscles, thought he might be more aware than previously thought and arranged to have him assessed.

We come to rest in front of a large sheet of acrylic glass suspended on a metal stand directly in front of me. Red lines criss-cross the screen, dividing it into boxes with small black and white pictures stuck in some of them. These line drawings show simple things—a ball, a running tap, a dog—and Shakila stands on the other side of the screen watching me intently as I stare at them.

“I want you to look at the picture of the ball, Martin,” Shakila says.

And…he did. After a series of tests, both to test his responses and different kinds of communication devices, Martin was equipped with pictures of symbols he could stare at in answer to questions and eventually outfitted with a computer which gave him a “voice.” Learning to communicate was a long, painstaking process, but it was worth it.

“If someone does not expect or is not expected to achieve, then they never will.” (Dr. Diane Bryen)

Eventually he regained more motor control, went to classes, held down several jobs, and even married! He wrote Ghost Boy: The Miraculous Escape of a Misdiagnosed Boy Trapped in His Own Body to share his story.

One of the hardest adjustments for him was making decisions. He could remember nothing from before his illness, and life had been structured around him for so long, he didn’t know how to make decisions at first. He was glad to be able to let people know his food was too hot or cold, he was thirsty, he’d like salt, etc. But even years later, when his girlfriend too him to buy some shoes, he was overwhelmed. He had only ever had the same kind that someone else had bought him, and there were so many choices, as well as the overstimulating atmosphere of so many people and loud music, that he broke down.

Some people caring for him were excellent. Some were thoughtless or just doing a job without care for the person inside the unresponsive body. “Do they really think that a limited intellect means a child can’t feel viciousness in a person’s touch or hear anger in the tone of their voice?” Something else that came to light after Martin began to express himself more extensively was that he had been horribly abused, especially in a longer term care facility that he had been placed in if his parents went on overnight or longer trips. He had been called names, slapped, pinched, handled roughly (thrown into a chair so hard he fell face first), neglected, and sexually abused.

He had a faith that sustained him:

The only person who knew there was a boy within the useless shell was God, and I had no idea why I felt His presence so strongly. I wasn’t exposed to the rituals and traditions of worshiping Him at church and knew that I hadn’t been before my illness because my family, although they believed in God, didn’t attend. Yet somehow I instinctively knew that He was with me as my mind knitted itself back together. At times it felt confusing to be surrounded by people, utterly alone and yet aware that God was my companion. Yet my faith didn’t waver. He was as present to me as air, as constant as breathing.
___

The one person I talked to was God, but He wasn’t part of my fantasy world. He was real to me, a presence inside and around that calmed and reassured me…I spoke to God as I tried to make sense of what had happened to me and asked Him to protect me from harm. God and I didn’t talk about the big things in life—we didn’t engage in philosophical debates or argue about religion—but I talked to Him endlessly because I knew we shared something important. I didn’t have proof that He existed, but I believed in Him anyway because I knew He was real. God did the same for me. Unlike people, He didn’t need proof that I existed—He knew I did.

One unsung hero in the book is Martin’s father. In Martin’s silent years, he heard arguments between his parents about his care. His father wanted to keep him at home. His mother wanted to put him in a full-time care facility, as the strain of his care was affecting their marriage and the rest of the family. But his father insisted Martin was still part of the family and needed to remain. His mother, for a time, distanced herself from Martin, so at home all his care fell to his father, who would get up early to feed and dress him and take him to the care facility, work long hours, bring him home and feed, bathe, and put him to bed. Basically, he didn’t have a life beyond work and caregiving for years, and he did it without complaint. Martin appreciated his “quiet and steady presence,” and eventually his mother came around as well, helping him tirelessly to increase his “vocabulary.”

This book is sad and horrifying on one level, considering all that Martin endured. But it’s inspiring on another that he triumphed over it. I particularly loved what he said as he was falling in love with the girl who would become his wife: “I’ve lived my whole life as a burden. She makes me feel weightless.”

It encourages me as my mother-in-law has become less and less responsive that perhaps she does hear and perceive more than she can express, and even if not, the way she is handled will make her feel secure and loved even if words aren’t getting through.

It also angers and saddens me that such abuses and inhumane treatment goes on in care facilities. We’ve come across our share of both good and bad caregivers in the various facilities my mother-in-law has been in. That Martin should have suffered such abuse is atrocious, but that in some cases, other caregivers observed and laughed is just infuriating. And the fact that more than one could wheel him away long enough to privately sexually abuse him without anyone questioning what was going on, where they were, why they were gone so long shows up the need for better monitoring. Unfortunately, in our experiences and I am sure all over the world, those places are woefully understaffed.

But it inspires me that some caregivers went the second mile in their concern and care. The one who first noticed that Martin seemed aware and responsive used to talk to him while she worked, and that’s one thing that caused his responsiveness. After trying to make a connection with others and failing, Martin essentially shut down inside himself. As this caregiver talked with him, he would look at her and follow her with his eyes. That she would notice this and then act on it speaks so well of her. That should be the norm, but too often facility caregivers slog through the everyday thankless monotonous tasks on autopilot. We have had our share of excellent caregivers as well who take time to interact with the patient as a person and notice the details that make a difference in their care and comfort.

Some readers would want to know that there are a couple of bad words in the book, and the section on Martin’s sexual abuse is graphic but not titillating and is mostly contained in one chapter. There is a video of a TED talk with Martin here, and a sweet interview with his wife here. They made this video and submitted it along with the manuscript when they were seeking a publisher for the book:

(Sharing with Semicolon‘s Saturday Review of Books, Carol’s Books You Loved)

Book Review: Watership Down

Fiver and Hazel are brother rabbits. Fiver is not a seer or prophet per se, but he has vague feelings of impending doom when something bad is about to happen, and he’s feeling strongly that some danger is about to come to the warren. Hazel takes him to the chief rabbit, but the chief rabbit doesn’t take him seriously and only goes into a long explanation about how hard it would be to evacuate a warren, especially the does and kittens.

One of the chief rabbit’s guards does take the warning seriously, however, and comes to find Hazel later. They agree to spread the word as much as they can that danger is coming and they are leaving the warren.

So a small group of rabbits sets out. Of course they face many dangers, the first of which is that the chief rabbit sends out guards after them to arrest them once he finds out they have left. So the first order of business is to get away as fast as possible. They face obstacles like rivers, enemies like cats and large birds and foxes, hardships like injuries, fatigue, and hunger. Once they find a place, they realize they have no does with them, so they have to decide what to do about that problem. And ultimately they have to defend their new home.

WatershipRichard Adams wrote Watership Down as a result of stories he used to make up to tell his daughters while they were in the car. His children urged him to write the stories down, but he resisted at first. But one night, after throwing the children’s book he was reading across the room in disgust, he decided to take a stab at writing. As he wrote sections, he would read those pages to his daughters and take their feedback. The book was published in the UK but didn’t really take off in sales until it was published in the USA.

Adams took care to have the rabbits act as rabbits, except for their being able to think and talk. There are no rabbits wearing clothing, sipping tea by the fireplace, or driving cars in this book. But endowing them with human-like thought and speech led to a rabbit mythology and history and human characteristics.

Adams insists that there is no symbolism or deeper meaning in Watership Down: it’s just an adventure story about rabbits. But there are still several things that can be gleaned from the story.

One is group dynamics. Hazel is not leading a coup or establishing himself as a new leader, but since he’s the one suggesting they leave, the others look to him to lead. He wisely does not assert anything like authority until the others show signs that they see him that way. He also is not a dictator (like another rabbit they meet along the way) or a micromanager. He knows how to rely on other rabbits’ strengths, like Blackberry’s ability to figure things out and Dandelion’s storytelling ability. Even the smallest rabbit, Pipkin, contributes to the group in ways. Bigwig, the chief rabbit’s guard initially, was the largest rabbit and their chief means of defense in a fight. Once he knows what to do and is assured a plan is a good one, he implements it with everything he has, but he isn’t afraid to question or oppose something he doesn’t think would work. Adams says in his introduction that some of the rabbits are based on people he knew and a couple on mythological figures.

The group also learns that, to grow and survive, they have to stretch themselves beyond their comfort zones. Usually does dig burrows, but as they have none, it’s either dig or stay out in the unsafe open. They also learn that making friends with other creatures they would normally avoid can sometimes benefit them.

At some times humans are portrayed as the embodiment of everything evil, and I objected to that at first, until I realized that, from a rabbit’s point of view, humans are a chief danger. But even a human does the rabbits a good turn near the end.

One section that particularly touched me was in one of their stories about El-ahrairah, kind of a folk hero of rabbit lore. Many of the tales about him are funny, celebrating his wit and cunning. In this particular tale, he has fought a long and harrowing battle, suffering great loss. As he comes back to the warren, weary and depleted, he sees a group of younger rabbits he does not know. He asks them to find one of the captains, but they’ve never heard of him. Then the young rabbits start making fun of the “white-whiskered old bunch” and criticizing them for “wicked” fighting – fighting that had kept these young rabbits safe. “If nobody fought in wars, there wouldn’t be any, would there? But you can’t get old rabbits to see that.” As El-ahrairah steps aside by himself, Lord Frith (the “god” of their legends) comes to him and asks if he is angry. He replies,

No, my lord, I am not angry. But I have learned that with creatures one loves, suffering is not the only thing for which one may pity them. A rabbit who does not know when a gift has made him safe is poorer than a slug, even though he may think otherwise himself.

I’ve heard of this book for years and wondered about it. Somehow I picked up that it was about rabbits, and they were on a journey, and I thought from the title that a boat or journey over water was involved (and though they do have to get over water a couple of times, the name comes from a real place in England called Watership Down). It seemed strange that a book about rabbits would be so popular, but since it was so well-loved, I wanted to read it some time. December turned out to be a nice month for it, as it didn’t fit into any of m reading challenges (it’s not quite old enough for the Back to the Classics Challenge, though many would consider it a classic). I like to read (or listen to audiobooks) just for enjoyment in December and not have to race to finish any challenges then, so this book fit the bill. There was one place it dragged just a little, and I wondered if almost 16 hours of the audiobook was going to get boring. But just then the group ran into another warren which seemed a relief at first: this warren wasn’t going to fight them, seemed to welcome them, but something about them seemed a bit off. I got caught up in that mystery, and thankfully figured it out before the rabbits did, and by then I was invested and eager to follow them on the rest of their journey.

To come to the end of a time of anxiety and fear! To feel the cloud that hung over us lift and disperse—the cloud that dulled the heart and made happiness no more than a memory! This at least is one joy that must have been known by almost every living creature.

It’s hard to say what age this book is for. It had trouble gaining a publisher at first because they thought only young children would like a book about bunnies, but it was a bit intense, even violent in places for young children. I think it has found a wide audience among all ages, and I am glad be familiar with the story and characters. I listened to the audiobook very nicely read by Ralph Cosham.

(Sharing with Semicolon‘s Saturday Review of Books, Literary Musing Monday, Carol’s Books You Loved)

Reading Plans for 2018

I have enjoyed reading ever since I first learned how, and the past few years I’ve benefited from being more intentional in my reading rather than just picking up the next thing on the shelf. I’ve wanted to incorporate classics, non-fiction, and new books as well as getting to more of my beloved fiction and some of the older books I have on hand. A few reading challenges have both helped me in those ways and made it fun to do with others. So one of my favorite things to do is map out my reading plans for the year. Many of the challenges overlap, so that helps – otherwise I’d probably only be able to do one. I’ve been tweaking it year by year to be more purposeful and yet have some flexibility in case I come across something during the year that I want to read that isn’t on any list. Last year was one of the best in all those ways, so I am hoping this year will be as well.

So these are the challenges I will participate in. For the first few I’ll just list the challenge and will share what books I’ll read when the time comes. Then I’ll list the challenges where I have already chosen what to read.

The Laura Ingalls Wilder Reading Challenge is hosted right here during the month of February! More information is here as well as an extended book list. On Feb. 1 I’ll post a sign-up post and share then what I’ll be reading.

LMA-button

Tarissa at In the Bookcase hosts the Louisa May Alcott Reading Challenge in June, so I will share at that time what I will read for that challenge.

aliterarychristmas-buttonTarissa also hosts the Literary Christmas Challenge for the last six weeks of the year. The main rule: read Christmas book!


Karen at Books and Chocolate hosts the Back to the Classics Challenge. She comes up with categories and we come up with a classic at least 50 years old to fit each category. She also gives away a prize – a $30 gift card to Amazon.com or The Book Depository. You get one entry for the prize drawing for six categories completed, two entries for nine categories completed, and three entries if you complete all twelve. We don’t have to name the books, but it helps me to do so, and we are allowed to change during the course of the year. As with each of these challenges, more information is provided at the links above. So the classics I am going to aim for this year include:

1.  A 19th century classic. Villette by Charlotte Bronte (1853)(Finished 6/30/18)

2.  A 20th century classic (published before 1968). The Story of My Life by Helen Keller (1903)(Finished 3/31/18)

3.  A classic by a woman author. Adam Bede by George Eliot (Mary Anne Evans)(1859)(Finished 5/19/18)

4.  A classic in translation (Any book originally written published in a language other than your native language.) 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea by Jules Verne (1870)(Finished 1/26/18)

5. A children’s classic. The Secret Garden by Frances Hodgson Burnett (1911)(Finished 2/3/18)

6.  A classic crime story, fiction or non-fiction, which she goes on to say can be a detective or spy novel. The Man Who Was Thursday by G. K. Chesterton. (1908)(Finished 1/18/18)

7. A classic travel or journey narrative, fiction or non-fiction. Journey to the Center of the Earth by Jules Verne (Finished 2/17/18)

8. A classic with a single-word title (no articles). Frankenstein by Mary Shelley (Finished 3/12/18)

9. A classic with a color in the title. Where the Red Fern Grows by Wilson Rawls (1961)(Finished 3/17/18)

10. A classic by an author that’s new to you. He Fell in Love With His Wife by Edward Payson Roe (1866)(Finished 4/8/18)

11. A classic that scares you (due to its length or it intimidates you in some way). The Hunchback of Notre Dame by Victor Hugo. (1831)(Finished 8/4/18). I have come close to reading it many times and then backed away, but Tarissa’s review encouraged me toward trying it.

12. Re-read a favorite classic. Ben-Hur: A Tale of the Christ by Lew Wallace, (1880)(Finished 4/17/18)

2018tbrbutton
Adam at Roof Beam Reader hosts the TBR Pile Challenge to encourage us to get to those books on our shelves, Kindles, or TBR lists. For this one we have to name the books we are going to read, along with two alternates (in case we can’t get through a couple on our list), and we have to have owned them for at least a year, so any book on our To Be Read pile published 2016 and earlier qualifies. And! Adam offers a prize: a drawing for a $50 gift card from Amazon.com or The Book Depository! Tempting for any book lover! So here is what I plan to read for this challenge:

  1. The Secret Garden by Frances Hodgson Burnett (Finished 2/3/18)
  2. The Man Who Was Thursday by G. K. Chesterton (Finished 1/18/18)
  3. Frankenstein by Mary Shelley (Finished 3/12/18)
  4. Where the Red Fern Grows by Wilson Rawls (Finished 3/17/18)
  5. Adam Bede by George Eliot (1859)(Finished 5/19/18)
  6. He Fell in Love With His Wife by Edward Payson Roe (1866, Finished 4/8/18)
  7. 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea by Jules Verne (1870, Finished 1/26/18)
  8. Journey to the Center of the Earth by Jules Verne (Finished 2/17/18)
  9. Ghost Boy: The Miraculous Escape of a Misdiagnosed Boy Trapped Inside His own Body by Martin Pistorious (2013, Finished 1/8/18)
  10. Going Like Sixty by Richard Armour
  11. Sins of the Past by Dee Henderson, Dani Pettrey, and Lynette Easton (2016, Finished 3/28/18)
  12. Another Way Home by Deborah Raney (2015, Finished 4/16/18)

Alternates: Anchor in the Storm by Sarah Sundin (2016, Finished 5/7/18) and Mozart’s Sister by Nancy Moser (2006)(Finished 1/28/18)

As I finish them, I’ll come back and link the title to my review.

mount-tbr-2017Bev hosts the Mount TBR Challenge to also encourage us to read the books we already own, but with a few differences. Every 12 books read is another level or “mountain” climbed. We don’t have to list the books yet (although some books for the above TBR challenge will count for this one as well), but we do have to commit to a level. I am tempted to try for Mt. Vancouver (36 books) since I passed that last year, but I think I’ll keep my options open and commit to Mount Blanc (24 books). The one main rule here is that the books have to have been owned by us before January 1, 2018. But that means every book in my house and Kindle app on Jan. 1, even the ones I just got for Christmas, count! I appreciate that because too often I push my newer books back behind the ones that have been sitting there for a while.

So I think that will keep me busy for a while. 🙂 People often ask me how I get to so much reading, so once I wrote Finding Time to Read. On the other hand, last year I read 76 books, but some blog friends read twice that! So I’m not at all in the “big leagues” when it comes to reading, but I do love it for various reasons.

Do you make any reading plans for the year? What do you look forward to reading this year?

(Sharing with Semicolon‘s Saturday Review of Book)

 

Book Review: Gospel Meditations for Christmas

GM4Xmas-product-cover-front-NEWGospel Meditations for Christmas by Chris Anderson, Joe Tyrpak, and Michael Barrett is the latest in their “Gospel Meditations” series (some of you might know Chris Anderson as the author of hymns such as His Robes for Mine and My Jesus Fair). The booklet is divided into 31 pages, one a day through the month of December (or any time, really, since these truths are eternal). Each page lists a Bible passage to read and then delves into some facet of the passage for a handful of paragraphs. The primary focus of the book is the Incarnation, and different aspects of it that the book covers are Christ’s humility, holiness, human ancestry; His being our peace, our mediator, our shepherd,; prophecies and promises about him; various names applied to Him; His Deity and humanity; and more. Quite a lot for 31 pages!

The best way to give you a flavor of the book is to share a few quotes from it:

Only as man could He die as a substitute for other men. And only as God could He suffer infinitely, paying for the sins of all the redeemed. (Day 4)

Escaping judgment begins with acknowledging that you deserve it. (Day 5)

Matthew begins his account of the good news with a record of Jesus’ ancestry. This isn’t some boring list of personal details that Matthew came across in research and decided to include as space-filler. No, this genealogy is Matthew’s attention- grabbing introduction, and it’s jam-packed with significance. (Day 7)

Consider whether your mental picture of Jesus fits the picture that Micah paints. The King that was born in Bethlehem is no longer a cherubic Baby. He’s a strong Shepherd, a majestic King, and the greatest military Commander of history. Jesus is the returning King and Judge before Whom every human will give account. Jesus is no longer a small Baby evoking your tender sympathy; He’s the world Sovereign demanding your total submission before it’s too late (Acts 17:31) (Day 9)

Having a biblical view of Jesus shouldn’t only lead you to lifelong submission; it should also lead you to patient perseverance. Like Micah’s original audience, we may respond in faith, yet die, having never seen the promises fulfilled. We must let it sink in that Micah’s generation never saw God make good on these words. Like them, we may spend our entire lives in unfulfilled longing. But if this Christmas prophecy that Micah uttered makes any difference to us today, it should fuel our persevering hope in God’s promises. Christian, even though we’re almost three millennia removed from Micah’s prophetic messages, keep longing for the return of the Shepherd-King from Bethlehem. Don’t lose heart. (Day 9)

What is a word? Don’t overthink it. It’s basically a means of communication. It’s a message, spoken or written, from one person to another—a form of revelation…Jesus Christ is God’s best and final communication to mankind. The Bible is God’s inspired Word. But Jesus is God’s incarnate Word—God revealed in human flesh. One of Christ’s great purposes in coming to earth was to reveal the unseen God. The apostle John returns to this motif throughout his writings. (Day 13)

This experience was so deeply satisfying for Simeon that he could say: “Now I’m ready to die.” God doesn’t promise us (like He had promised Simeon) that we’ll get to physically see Jesus before we die. But God does promise everyone who follows King Jesus that we will see His face and live in His presence after we die, and forever! To know and love and see the Lord is what we were made for. So the only way we can die in peace is if we have embraced the gospel by faith and if we are confident that very soon we are going to see the King with our very eyes. (Day 27)

Christmas sentimentality doesn’t help in tough circumstances. As I look back over the past decade and remember what Decembers have looked like for me, I recall many happy memories, but a lot of hardships, too. At Christmastime I’ve visited halfway houses, nursing homes, and funeral homes. I’ve received news of birth defects and of strokes, of terrorism and of persecution. And I’ve spent much time with loved ones who still don’t see their need for Jesus. When such burdens weigh heavily in December, Christmas lights don’t help. But Christmas truth does! (Day 31)

This is an excellent resource to focus your hearts and minds on Jesus and what was involved in His coming as well as many ways His incarnation should affect us personally.

(Sharing with Woman to Woman Word-filled Wednesdays, Coffee for Your Heart, the Literary Christmas Reading Challenge, Semicolon‘s Saturday Review of Books, Literary Musing Monday, Carol’s Books You Loved)

Literary Christmas Reading Challenge Wrap-up

A Literary Christmas: 2017 Reading Challenge // inthebookcase.blogspot.com

Tarissa at In the Bookcase has been hosting a Literary Christmas Reading Challenge the past few weeks which I have enjoyed participating in.

Here are my Christmasy reads this year:

Evergreen: A Christiansen Winter Novella by Susan May Warren
Gospel Meditations for Christmas by Chris Anderson, Joe Tyrpak, and Michael Barrett (will finish this today or tomorrow)
The Great Christmas Bowl by Susan May Warren
Keeping Christmas by Dan Walsh
One Enchanted Christmas by Melissa Tagg
Sarah’s Song by Karen Kingsbury
The Shoe Box by Francine Rivers
Silver Bells by Deborah Raney

I think that’s more than ever before, but due mostly to most of them being shorter novellas.

Thank you, Tarissa! It was fun!