Bump!

I read about 64 pages last night and I like it. It does take about 20 pages to get you in, as it takes a little while to get used to her writing style, and also the fact that she is describing people you know nothing about, that all seem to have similar names .

But it does step into gear and develops a flow.

bkw said:

Maybe you could read it on the train?

2the9s said:

People would think that i was very scholarly, reading that book amongst all that piss.

bkw said:

I hope you remembered that the guys are reading it nude. Also it looks like you might finish first..pucker up BKW!

Lleena said:

Is this still going?

Lleena said:

YAY!!! I got da book before work today!! Bedtime reading!!!

I bought the book today!

sag10 said:

I started reading it today!

2the9s said:

Just orgnote me and I'll explain it to you.

althom said:

Hey althom...

OMG, u know guyz after this book, u know what i reckon we should read? This book about a perfumery, this man who makes perfumes and is a killer and recognises his victims by their scents!! It's a thriller!!! It lookz like a killer of a read!!!

Lleena said:

i'm in but i'm getting that book from the library. i love the library.

JasmineFire said:

Has anyone else started it yet? I'm about 60 pages in.

We are learning a little about what it was/is like in the Islamic Republic of Iran if you're a girl or woman. There's some pretty horrifying stories about the way that female students' appearances are monitored and regulated.

There are also very interesting connections that Nafisi is trying to draw between what they are reading and the lives they are forced to live. (Right now the chapter focuses a lot on Lolita) But what I like about it is that these connections aren't forced. At times she is offering readings of Nabokov's works (both Lolita and Invitation to a Beheading) as parabales that can help these women better understand their own plights (especially the way that Humbert Humbert "solipsizes" his own desire for the young Lolita, and how they feel the state does that to them); but she also cautions both us and herself (and her students) about taking these parallels too much to heart.

She even begins by mentioning Nabokov's own definition of art, "playing the violin in the void" (or something like that) -- in other words art is just a pasttime while absurdity swirls around. And their meetings (the class that Nasiri teaches at her home) have something of that air about them as well, they are oases for these girls apart from the arbitary cruelty of the police etc.

I think there is a real question in this first section -- one that will be explored later -- about what is the purpose of what they are doing? What is the purpose of education, literature etc.

I'm quite a way further into it now and after that chapter it explores more of the lead up so you get a better perspective. I wont say any more for fear of ruining it.

I will say that the question you raise is yet to be answered.

I have some little gripes about her writing style (and a few other things that I will mention when everyone is finnished) but am enjoying the read. It is an eye opener.

I started reading it last night!

So far I have to say that, while the author HAS spent alot of time talking about each character, I think this is essential perhaps to us as readers to become familiar with them as they encounter character development throughout da novel as we read on. Her descriptions are vivid, and narrator's voice is very knowing and intelligent, yet down to earth, which made me as a reader warm to her style of writing. I'm interested to see how things unravel in this book!!

Was excited enought to read more, but I wanted to go to sleep



Will keep posting as i read on in timez

bkw said:

Gripe away!

lilmissmissy said:

Yeah, like bkw said above it sometimes hard to keep the characters straight, but she definitely wants us to get to know them individually. Notice how much time she spends describing how they remove their veils and such when they enter her house and as they do so they begin to have individual features. There is nothing individual about these women in public. It's only in this private space where that is possible. (Though there are even limits to the "private" -- like when the police enter Nasiri's house looking for her neighbor and see their sattelite dish).




.
[Edited 1/16/05 15:40pm]

2the9s said:

IT made me feel claustrophobic to think that it is in these few hours that they get to be in themselvez- not another woman in a cloak. How can one from this culture have a taste of the freedom of Western culture without becoming addicted, wanting more, and eventually wanting to flee Iran? If it were me, that would so happen!! Let's see what happens as we read on!!

2the9s said:

I just read "The Portrait of Dorian Gray". It is a great book.

I won't be joining the Book Club 2005 just yet. I gotta give school 5 more months then take my licensing test in June.
[Edited 1/16/05 16:40pm]

2the9s said:

My two major gripes with her writing are:

1. She jumps quite suddenly in time, so that sometimes you are wondering whether she is talking about now, 1979 or 1997. You eventually work it out but I feel she could be more clear.

2. Her failure to use parenthesis when relating conversations that seem to be direct quotes. I find I get lost in some of those block paragraphs where it is difficult to work out who said what without re-reading it (maybe I'm just thick).

bkw said:

I noticed that too. I guess it's because she's trying to keep in mind a time before this repressive government came to power, a time that these girls would only be aware of through stories from their families. She's trying to pass down her nostalgia to them I guess, as well as to us Western readers.

As missy said above:



From our point of view, that's right. But why should they have to flee their country because of these nutjobs in power? I think that their "addiction" to the West only exists in that it gives them a break from the government.

Sorry, off on a tangent here, but it's interesting to see how there are two different views of the West that her students have: the literature she gives them and the popular culture (that they get from the sattelite dishes etc.). I don't think these are the same things.



Yeah, I guess she learned that from Joyce and the other writers that she's read. I agree it's distracting.

2the9s said:

No, they're not the same, and i dont think that Nafisi suggests they are at all. Hers is definately a love of the "art" of literature. How all great literature tells a story without holding your hand, letting the reader make up his/her mind as to what it all means. It does not pass a moral judgment on its characters and largely lets the reader do this.

This is what she struggles to get the dissenting students in her classes to understand. She tries to get them to look at this art with an open mind and not an agenda.

2the9s said:[quote]

bkw said:

I know she says that they look at these literary works as fictatious- as they are, but let u remember that art imitates life as art imitates life, and around da circle we go. That also makes me feel claustrophobic. But she rebels from the restrictions had in the universities she lectured at by resigning. Where is she now I wonder? Is she still in her living room? Or is she still there in Iran tryin to make a difference? Or...DID she flee? Okay, this is going beyond the book, but it certainly makes me ponder these thoughtz!!

Will be reading more tonight. Will be bock!! Muhahahahah!

Are we suppose to be reading the book now?

Meanwhile back at the ranch...

http://www.cnn.com/2005/A...index.html