I don't think most of us have the background/training to get into structural literary criticism. God knows if it gets beyond the basic progression of plot, I'm lost.

I'd kind of like to see somebody who understands that sort of thing use a book we've all read as in illustration of some of the points of lit crit. If I've got a point of common reference I can least try to follow the points being made.

I'd kind of like to see somebody who understands that sort of thing use a book we've all read as in illustration of some of the points of lit crit.

This is a good idea. Refer to something we all read at some point -- The Scarlet Letter or Catcher in the Rye, say -- as an example. Although I wouldn't want to limit conversation to that particular kind of crit. I don't read books with that in mind, to be honest -- I read them because I think I'll relate to them in some way, or because I think (hope?) the central conflict will make me look at some facet of life in a new way.

And then sometimes I just read to go somewhere completely different than my life, too, but that's another thing.

Finished Mr. Sandman. Can't wait to discuss.

So, is the consensus right now that for one of our upcoming books we should select something mainstream and/or popular that more folks can relate to?

Ah, forgot to look for book! Who's the author again?

Barbara Gowdy.

When in doubt, check the first post:

[link]

Is today the day we can start discussing Mr. Sandman?

Yup. And how did you not get a new post number?

ETA: For the with-it challenged, like me, post number doubling explained in BBABB.

Weird. I saw your post in BBABB, but I hadn't noticed earlier.

Anyway.

Wolfram, I know you posted up-thread that you were excited about talking about the book. Anything in particular jump out at you?

I just finished Saturday, and I'm still processing it. I think I'm overall "meh" about it. I liked some of the characters. Didn't care one way or the other about others. I think discussion may help me process things better.

It seemed to me that Gowdry threw together every dysfunctional family cliche she could think of and tried to write a story to tie them all together with, imo, mixed results.

I am also frustrated that I can't listen to Joan's composition, because I think it would be neat to hear.

Kim, I had mixed feelings about the book when I finished it too. I was really excited starting out because right from the first couple of pages I found myself intrigued. Sure the family was dysfunctional, yet they were oddly functional at the same time. It felt a little like The Royal Tenenbaums meets American Beauty.

I liked the way Gowdy intertwines the stories, and really fleshed out the characters with the notable and disappointing exception of Joan. I was a little let down too, that we never heard the actual composition. But I believe it was the author’s intention to leave Joan obscure and use her as a method of defining the rest of the family.

I thought the parents' mutual homosexuality and its resolution worked. Older sister's (memfault) near asexuality also worked. NSM, younger sister's (memfault) hypersexuality although it was an interesting contrast to her sister and her parent's lack of heterosexual urges.

All in all, it was a fun read. I wasn't so enamored by it that I'd run out and read all of Gowdy's works, but I didn't have to trudge through it either.

Poor lonely Book Club thread.

What is the significance of the song "Mr. Sandman"? Why did Gowdy choose this song to build her narrative around?

I think it may have something to do with the lyric "Mr. Sandman, I'm so alone/ain't got nobody to call my own" and the idea that Al refers to himself as "Yours" to Gordan and Sophia.