Author: cyndarling

It’s that post-Christmas, post-New Year time when I find myself with a pile of books and that snow-ridden setting that allows me a little time to read. There’s just that little bit more time to allow books to be strewn abo

ut my floor, ripe for the picking and switching when I get to the end of a chapter in one. Right now, I’m reading a bunch of books that have some common themes, although I did not seek these themes out on purpose.

To start, I am reading All the Single Ladies: Unmarried Women and the Rise of an Independent Nation by Rebecca Traister. I have an idea for a    non-fiction book that studies the narratives available to women of the 21st Century, and so, Traister’s book immediately appealed to me when I saw it on the shelf. I’ve been making my way through it, delightedly, and here’s why: this book is part memoir and part historical and social narrative. I love the mix of the two. But, I’ll be honest, I may have, at least once in my reading, skipped past a chapter on the history and gone directly to the author’s narrative account of her own life. I just eat that stuff up.

Interestingly, Traister notes that she started research for the book right before she married her husband. I love the idea that she decided to write about single life just as she embarked upon married life; the two lifestyles seem decidedly contingent upon each other, as her book reveals.

Contrary to what the title may indicate, this is not a book advocating only single life. Or married life. Or any one lifestyle. What the book does do is study the ways that single life for women has evolved and the ways it has transformed marriage and society in general. Traister looks at the ways that marriage age has risen and she also studies the various aspects of single life that help women to enter marriage more fully self-realized and with a broader system of career and friendships that become a part of that marriage. She also examines the elements that make single life a viable and sometimes preferable choice for women. Her task is not to advocate one lifestyle but to point out the revolutionary way that such choice has changed women’s lives in love, career and sense of self. I’m not done with the book–indeed, I tried to slow down my reading of it because I was racing through. I’ll let you know what further gems I find!

Kate Bolick’s Spinster: Making a Life of One’s Own is another title that would probably scare away some readers. As I was telling a friend recently, the book is brilliant, and the title is the author’s attempt to re-frame that word or to understand it in historical context while re-examining its true meaning in our present time. I am loving this book. And not because I want to be a spinster. I love this book for the way that Bolick interweaves her own personal memoir of love and career and independence alongside of her close study of selected female literary figures from New York City’s recent past. Some of these writers she profiles include Charlotte Perkins Gilman, Edith Wharton and Edna St. Vincent Millay. Yes, this is a book for literature majors, as we appreciate the close study of these women’s writing exploits against the backdrop of early 20th century NYC. But, the book has great appeal beyond that because of the way Bolick writes with such candor about her own search for self understanding, satisfaction with love and career success.

Interestingly, but not surprisingly, her book takes her on a journey of investigating her own mother’s experiences with writing, career and marriage. Some of the moments of connection she finds with her mother’s younger self are surprising and poignant. And, as I read, I now have several new female writers to read–women who came to New York and forged, often revolutionary, lifestyles where they wrote and loved and lived in the city, going against the expectations of their families to settle down early and raise children.

As with Traister’s book above, this book is not an advocate for any one life. Most of the women in the book do go on to marry, and Bolick paints sensitive and insightful portraits of the ways their relationships and marriages fed their writing lives or vice versa. I’m close to done with this book but am also drawing it out. Bolick provides an ample appendix of additional related titles, no doubt brought about by her research,  to ensure that readers continue their pleasure in exploring her topic!

It’s rare to feel close to history or to political action.  But, today, I feel close to it.  Last night, I attended a panel held by the New York Press Club that discussed the Occupy movement and, specifically, its coverage by the press.  It was a fascinating evening as the panelists were from a range of points of view:  Bill Buster, a representative of Occupy Wall Street, Michael Amon, a Wall Street Journal editor, Robert C. Hockett a professor of law and also a protestor with the Occupy Wall Street movement, and the final person, Julie Menin, Chair of lower Manhattan’s Community Board 1, the community board for a neighborhood in lower Manhattan that is close to Zuccotti Park and is therefore affected by the protest camps and all they bring to the area.

I found the range of views interesting as well as educational.  It was partly quite interesting to hear from Bill Buster, the man representing the Occupiers.  I have been curious to hear what the “platform” or argument of the Occupiers is, and he stated it in various ways throughout the night.  It was most interesting to note this Buster’s fervor and the way that he stated the Occupy Movement’s desire to be a non-partisan and instead human movement, one that accepts all points of view.  So interesting also to hear the tone of his voice as he brought up examples of police treatment and lack of press coverage. His observations that the press seemed to purposely not cover major events of violence and brutality seems a bit fanatical.  I don’t know.  Perhaps his observations are legit or perhaps he has drunk too much of the cool aid living down amongst the protesters.  I was a bit frustrated by his lack of concrete demands–I wanted to hear some actual concrete steps he’d like Wall Street or the President to take.  Instead, he repeated that The Occupy movement is  not going away and will make its presence known so that Wall Street and politicians know that they serve the people and not the other way around.

It was quite fascinating to hear Julie Menin speak about the logistical challenges created by the Occupy camp down int he neighborhood.  Two of the big problems have been controlling the noise created by the drum circles and dealing with police barricades that have encroached on local businesses.  She stated that when each of these became a problem, the board worked with the protesters and the police to negotiate changes.  For example, the drum circle was limited to two shorter time periods per day.  And, she was able to have the police barricades moved so that people could still frequent the stores down in the area.  She seemed to have a good attitude about the whole enterprise:  she seems to see her job as working WITH the protestors, not trying to get them out or go against their cause.

The Wall Street editor, Michael Amon, had some general things to say.  I guess one element of the Occupy Wall Street story that has become interesting is that because it has continued on for this long, it is threatening to not be newsworthy.  There begin to be fewer and fewer new angles to take on the movement.  I think that this fact itself, is kind of newsworthy.  What happens when a protest movement sets up shop and becomes common place?  When it doesn’t fade away but in fact becomes part of the everyday life of the area and the city and the nation?  That is significant and I think the implications of this longstanding characteristic of the movement needs to be explored.

Finally, the reason I found the night so interesting is because I got up this morning and read about how the police moved in last night in the early hours of the morning and cleared the park of protestors.  I wondered if Bill Buster knew that was happening.  The protesters were being cleared out for sanitary reasons and also because they had been violating the rules of the park that said the park could be open 24 hours a day with free access to all.  With such large groups of protestors sleeping there, free access was not being allowed to all.  From what I read in the paper, protestors reconvened in Foley Square.  I have to say that just looking at the pictures in the newspaper is pretty striking.  Police in riot gear, protestors being tear gassed, protestors lined up face-to-face with the police. These are images out of the 1960s, although the faces and the intentions are markedly different.  There doesn’t seem to be as much of a split between generations as the 60s had.  There also doesn’t seem to be such a split between north and south.  The issues are different.

Here’s what I also found fascinating from the discussion last night:  the difference of the handling of Oakland, CA protestors versus the NYC protestors.  It seems that in Oakland and Portland there has been more animosity between police and protestors.  There have also been clear-outs of the parks earlier.  I thought about this.  The panel last night said how the attitude between the police and protestors and even the people of the neighborhood seemed to be friendly.  There has been this attitude, in NYC, of wanting to give the protestors a place, or wanting to accommodate them, whereas in the west coast, things have not been that way.  Part of me wonders about this.  Having lived in this NYC area for awhile now, I wonder if this NYC treatment is in fact partly a cultural thing about NYC.  NY likes to have room for its eccentricities.  It likes to showcase them and make room for them. But, I, a bit cynically, think that the reason NY does this is because NY has money.  It isn’t REALLY affected by the protests yet. Right now, these protests are an inconvenience, a spectacle, something interesting.  New Yorkers with all of their money, and let’s not forget this is Wall Street money, have deep pockets from which to draw this tolerance for these protestors.  Do the protestors in fact risk becoming just another one of NY’s quirky side shows that doesn’t really chip away at or affect its moneyed class?  The west coast, on the other hand, has a tradition of protest that may be different in some ways, although I am not sure how it is different.  There is a culture of counter culture that perhaps makes the interactions between police and protestors more genuine, more antagonistic.  The difference between these two geographical areas and their treatment of protestors also rests on the fact that Zuccotti Park is a privately owned park where some of the laws about taking up space, etc can be overlooked if the owner allows it whereas the parks on the west coast are public parks and so the protestors come up against laws much more quickly. But, isn’t this kind of the point? Isn’t breaking the law and forcing police action part of what true protest looks like?  Are the Zuccotti park protestors in fact just living off of the private largesse that they are protesting against?  In fact, the privatization of a park means that often it has its own rules–outside of the public laws enforced for public rights.  And isn’t this what we have seen in America with the banks but also in other aspects of life: that the privatized interests play by different rules, rules that are sometimes above the law or allow people to operate according to another set of laws?

The Giant’s House by Elizabeth McCraken.

I have great affection for this novel.  A strange little book, it portrays the love story between a librarian and a much younger man, a man afflicted with a syndrome that causes him to be disproportionately tall.  McCracken’s book is beautiful because of the way it captures the affection and love between such an unlikely pair.  Even while the circumstances of their friendship and eventual relationship sometimes walk the line between what might be considered appropriate in more conventional circles, McCracken shows the true love of their regard and care for each other, right down to acts of care for the young man’s increasingly ill body.  Read this book.  It is strange.  It is odd.  And it is unerringly sweet.

Pictures of You by Caroline Leavitt

This is a book that I enjoyed reading.  It isn’t revolutionary in technique, it doesn’t make any great statements about modern life, it isn’t cutting edge.  Instead, it is just a simple story about the intersection of four peoples’ lives after an accident that happens and leaves questions about individuals’ motives.

The technique of using a single moment of violence to unravel characters’ lives and reveal weaknesses and strengths that characters didn’t even know existed is one that works brilliantly.  Leavitt has a particular knack for describing minute details–gestures, inflections of voice, eye contact–to reveal moments between people.  One of the main characters’ has a penchant for photography, and photos become a way in which characters express subtle feelings and ideas to each other.  Leavitt uses this photography creatively as a device in her narrative.

Away by Amy Bloom

Bloom tells the tale of a woman who makes her way in America as a young immigrant from Russia.  Bloom’s descriptions are lush and her recreation of the historical time period in America is accurate and realistic.  Her main character’s past is one of complete loss.  She lost her family to pogroms in Russia.  It is because of the devastation she already suffered even before coming to America that she is able to embrace, however painful they seem, additional experiences of arduous self-sacrifice in America.  She makes her way through bravely seeking out opportunities to work with the upper classes in America all while seeking out companionship in true friends she meets along the way.  She moves from the east coast all the way out to Washington state, befriending a colorful cast of characters who are, themselves, simply trying to make it in the poverty-stricken lives they are eeking out in the underbelly of America’s turn of the century cities.