Man in Full ~ Tom Wolfe ~ 4/99 ~ Book Club Online Export

I can get this book in hardback for $11.00. Please email me if you want one, and don't delay, it's a whopper.

Ginny

At Charles suggestion, by way of the grapevine, I found a great place to buy A Man in Full. Try this Link... 4 bucks ... 4 books. And I see Ginny's offer too.

North Shore-Long Island

Great choice..Just started it..look forward to discussing it.

Bettilu

I'm almost finished reading A Man in Full. I must admit, there are times when I find the going tough.Some of the characters in the book seem to wander in and out , i.e. Conrad. I found him a most sympathetic character but what is he doing now? Maybe everything will come together in the last few pages. I much preferred Bonfire of the Vanities. My copy was $33.00 so I wish I had known about the different places in the U.S. to buy it. I'll check in to see the opinions of others with regard to 'A Man in Full'.

So nice to see such a large group assembling for our March 1 discussion. This book has raised quite a firestorm of opinion, pro and con, it will be great fun to discuss it!

Ginny

We got a copy at a Sam's for about $18. No time to read it now, though!

I gave it to my son at Christmas. We have this nice friendly bookstore named CROWN and it only cost me 17.00. He''s finished and dropped it off for me just as I was (and still am) crawling toward the finish line of MAGIC MOUNTAIN. So please count me aboard A MAN IN FULL although I may be a little slow.

Great, Carol, we may all be a little slow with this one, am thinking of doing one as we like it or when we get it read, just for a change?

What would you all think of that?

Ginny

I have about 100 pages of the book read and am sure I won't be able to renew at the library. Guess I should put in another request for it. I sure wish that Wolfe would be a little more economical with his descriptions, but must say I am enjoying the book. Do hope we don't spend too much time in the Snake House.

Ginny, I think the idea of taking this book slowly is a good one. Since we have no law that prevents us from taking a book for 6 weeks or 2 months in the BC Online I certainly see no problem with doing so when we have such big books. It is easy to change the anticpated starting dates for various discussions once the decision is made.

Larry

I read the book last month and enjoyed it tremendously. There are so many fun tidbits of information intersperced through out the book. I spent much of my time researching these neat little tidbits. Can't wait to start the discussion.

From the North Shore of Long Island

Started reading this book and couldn't put it down...sat up until 4 AM and am now somewhere in the 400's...of course will have to reread to really get things straight...but he sure is some story teller... I like to read a good book at one sitting...then go back and really read it for more than the story line...It will be very interesting discussing it.

Bettilu

Bettilu, and Barb, we look forward to your input in this book! So excited to learn you'll be joining us.

For A Man in Full we've made a bold new decision, thanks to our Larry's suggestion, and it's only an experiment, but we'll take the first two chapters in the first week in March and discuss those, and then proceed at our own leisurely pace as we will. For 2 1/2 years we've read books in the Book Club Online, toeing the line rigidly to a schedule. Our recent selection probably SHOULD have been taken slower, yet we're going to finish within the month.

So that everyone who wants to can join us, we are proposing a bold new approach which the GB has done all the time, leisurly and slow reading which we can all enjoy. If the book is not GOOD enough to hold up to that schedule, we'll find it out soon enough, but I'm far enough along in A Man in Full to know you could chat over the first few chapters for a year.

Hope to see you there, it's a big book and it will be a fun read and experience!

Ginny

OK, Ginny, got the book and started reading it - so far, so good. I'm not a "deep thinker" when it comes to discussing books but do enjoy reading all the interesting commments.

Eileen Megan

I'll reconstruct and repost - I think there was another crash here.

As I was saying....I've been reading a Tom Wolfe discussion on the NYTimes Book Review site ("Full" Speed Ahead"). Some drivel and some interesting posts - I haven't gone all the way through them. But what strikes me is the tone and posture of the posts there (and I'm generalizing) - but it seems to me that there it's more a stage for mental gyrations and here on B&L it's more like a community of Readers. Confident in who you are as opposed to somehow having something to prove. I think we're all very lucky. Just my observation.

Charlie

Charlie, that was beautiful the first time and it's beautiful this time, too. I think you have hit on the very thing we're about here. Here is your first post, it was too good not to save:

"I've been reading a Tom Wolfe folder on NY Times Book Review ("Full" Speed ahead). Some interesting things, some discussion on entertainment v.s. literature, etc., etc. One is struck again how other Forums are such a stage, platforms for 'intellectual' gymnastics - and how B&L is really a community of readers. Quite different. We're all very lucky here. "

I agree with you. Thank you for saying it.

Ginny

Charlie and Ginny, I feel that most of us have passed that point of trying to impress others with what we say. Therefore, we are free to say what we think about a book knowing that we accept each other for what we are and have to say.

Just a brief comment on "A Man in Full". I am about 325 pages into the book and am wondering why he didn't make this two or three books. I suppose everything will come together by the end. In some instances I am learning more than I really want to know and wish for some brevity in his fine writing.

Larry

Larry, believe me when I say it all comes together ... I read the book last month and really enjoyed it.

I, too, have already read A Man in Full and will reserve judgment until I see other postings. Briefy, though, I don't feel that his book is a masterpiece by any stretch. In some places Wolfe is downright pedantic. Has anyone read the new Sue Miller?

So wild to read the early but very diverse reactions to our book of the month.

Larry: I am glad you've suggested a less hectic pace this time around. I expect there are varying opinions to this as well,but it should work better for me. Could we start nominating our books by the pound please...another huge one here.

I've only just begun,but have already learned something that should hold me in good stead...the proper attire for a Qail hunt. Hey you never know

I finished the book about noon today (after reading until midnight last night). I had to return the book to the library today as I couldn't renew it. This was the most reading I had done in a long time. Think there are some interesting topics to discuss about the story and the characters as well as the writing. Just a few more days and we can begin.

Larry

Maida!! Welcome, welcome!

We look forward to your thoughts here in our new experiment on the Ides of March: our new approach to A Man in Full .

Basically, we're somewhat put on hold by LJ's death and so our current selection, The Magic Mountain is running a little behind, but should conclude on time. If not, it can cheerfully wind up while we begin this one.

Our format will continue as a RoundTable of friends gathering to discuss a book, EVERYONE is welcome, and, is, indeed, necessary to get a balanced picture.

We'll start with the first two chapters, but if you have returned your book to the library, not to worry: we'll try to focus in on the ideas in the chapters, and the other elements: plot, characterization, tone, theme, etc., that make or break a book. I know people who loved it, I know people who absolutely HATE it, and it should be a wonderful ride!

Everyone is welcome to chat over what struck them and respond to what others say, too, I'm excited about this book.

Now let's start getting up nominations for our April book, I had a friend write from England that she just read Larry's Party and really enjoyed it, had I read it? I'm going to nominate it again there!

Ginny

Ginny--As a child visiting my Grandmother's farm I was told that it took a long time for a cow to eat and digest its food--through multiply stomachs--Well that's what is happening in my re-reading MM some 35 years after the first go around--and I'm still not finished--but I do have the March selection and look forward to joining the group again as I have learned so much from each participant--even the readers who wrote "this is not for me"!Right now in Indianapolis we have whirling snow--not an avalance--but my imagination is working fine and I'm whirling around with Hans--yts.

Yvonne, great!! Had an email from Larry this morning that March 15 suits him as well, so we'll begin A Man in Full on that date with bells on, MM can continue as long as it needs to!

Ginny

I'm new to this, but look forward to joining you on March 15. I'm about two-thirds of the way through the book. I'm waiting for things to come together -- I hope it's worth the wait!

Sarah!! Welcome, welcome!! We are delighted to have you and look forward to your comments on this book, I'm brimming with questions, don't think we'll have a hard time finding topics!!

Ginny

Ginny why the change to the 15th????

Barb: Because of The Magic Mountain? MM is the current Book Club Online discussion, usually the BC Online starts the first of every month. This time it was interrupted by the death of LJ Klein, and the instability of the database? And so this coming week it will conclude. So we delayed the start of this one until MM could conclude Chapter 7 next week and discuss some upcoming books the next, and vote for April. And I hope everyone reading this will come in our Nominations for April folder and help us get a winner for April, we've got several great ones already nominated.

I do apologize, I know pushing it back two weeks is inconvenient, it's never happened before, but then, again, one of our Books Leaders has not died before either, and I do sincerely hope no leader or participant will do so again. I am actually quite eager to begin A Man in Full and hope everyone else is, too.

The Ides of March does seem a propitious time to begin Charlie Croker's saga, when you think of it? I'm so glad you're with us, Barb, have been anxiously watching the folders for you!

Ginny

You know, we're breaking all kinds of ground here in our Books folders and so why not break another area?

How would you like, ideally, to take this one? Would you like a LEADER format in which one person tries to synthesize the comments or would you like a general roundtable approach?

We're undergoing a massive reorganization to try to meet the needs and desires of everyone participating, and a Man in FULL is a good place to begin, as it's new!!

All ideas are welcome!

Ginny

Jim Olson said: I don't like the way these discussions are structured in terms of going through a book by sections and
chapters with canned discussion questions.

I agree. But whatever methods, structures or format, I like reading with the group, and learn more than I contribute.

I too like Jim Olson's suggestion on looking at the book as a whole and having a "loose" discussion on what aspect of the book interests you the most. Whatever the format, it ought to be interesting!

Eileen Megan

Jim, I'm glad to see you in the Book Club Online, and I thought your poem to LJ was very moving.

I do think we have come far enough to take chances with our format! That's why I brought it up, and I, too, like the idea of just comments, let's try it!

I was actually coming in here to say "wonder if any of you want to scrap the 2 chapters a week thing," when I saw your posts.

Personally I found enough in the first chapter to talk on a month, and it's going to be interesting to see how different people have perceived these characters and situations. Originally the idea was that we would take it slow and ENJOY a selection for once, but if you look at that thing, 2 chapters a week would find us still discussing it next year.

Want to just take it as a whole? I have to warn you, the times we've tried it, it hasn't worked, and the discussion has died in a few days. What do the rest of you say? We have a lot of people joining us for this one, what's your pleasure?

Is there anybody who was counting on taking it only by the first two chapters on the 15th? Or can we all get it read??

Jim, now I really want to know what a "canned" question is!

Ginny

I believe that there are both pros & cons for the kind of format used in discussing a book. To some degree,the format might depend on the book,and it's possible to start with one kind & evolve to another kind of format. I guess the relevant position is that people be encouraged to read the book AND TO PARTICIPATE IN ANY FASHION with the discussions.

As an example,even though I detested Magic Mountain,I feel that the more formal type of discussion was very important for that particular book.

A drawback of discussion leader posed questions may be to discourage some people from contributing,if they feel intimidated by the questions.

I agree with Jim that a book as a whole has to be looked at in its entirety.It's difficult to discuss a book unless you have read the whole volume and to get some "feel" for what you have read.

However,some may be unable to finish a book before the discussion begins,but the ongoing discussions add to the enjoyment and understanding of the reading..We never know what road the discussions will take us down,and for me,that is one of the most fascinating and exciting aspects of this SN site..Book discussions seem to have a life of their own,they ebb and flow,and regardless of the format,they add a whole lot of seasoning to my life.

Hear! Hear! Jim Olson! I, too, detest "canned" questions though I appreciate the effort and good intentions behind them. They are meant to stimulate interest and discussion, I'm sure, yet it seemed to me in the late Hard Times discussion that we mostly ignored the canned questions and just discussed away, raising many dandy issues and enjoyable comments from all who participated. I do think the structuring, e.g. two chapters this week--two chapters next week etc, helped keep us focused on just what we were there for. At first, I had thought I would hate reading a book in such "serial" fashion but it worked out fine. For such a long book as Man in Full, I'm with Ginny. Take it a little at a time.

Easy for me to talk! I have no intention of reading this book at this time! But I'm going to be here following the discussion with great interest, intending to read this lengthy book at my leisure one of these days when I have the time. I've enjoyed every Tom Wolfe book I've ever read and know I will enjoy this one too.

I think this book was so rich in themes and content that it probably doesn't lend itself, at least for me, to doing only a couple of chapters at a time. This is particularly difficult for those of us who have borrowed it from the library and had to return it after three weeks.

Ginny, I wonder if we could put a little table above with the main character's names. I met to jot down the names but got rushed and returned the book to the library on the last day, after finishing it, and know that I can't remember all of the names.

Larry

Larry, I think that's an excellent suggestion: a table with the names of the main characters, there are plenty. I'll start listing them here as I reread the book this week, if you'll put them up?

Since I don't see any objection to taking the book as a whole, nor is anyone bound to the Discussion Questions, I only have one caveat: we must make a mental pledge, now, since we're starting out on uncharted waters here, to actually TALK to each other over these themes or points we bring up. If Bill raises the stereotype issue, we need to all address it instead of presenting a paper of our own on racial relations? That's important here.

The Book Club Online has never wanted for active debate. I can't debate YOU if you don't respond to me. I'm willing to try this once, but we'll need everyone's help. The marvelous thing about this book is the varied reviews: some love it, some hated it, seems to be no inbetween. Ugg Ugg is what one person wrote me, ugg.

If you don't think that these excesses exist however, you are dead wrong, if you don't think these quail "plantations" are real, you are again dead wrong. Perhaps the camp of the excess is what gets you, can't wait to find out.

So we'll see.

Looking forward to talking it over with you all!

Is somebody researching Tom Wolfe? I read several articles on the research he did for this book, would like to see them again, did not save them. If you get one, we can put it up in the heading?

Ginny

Glad I just happened in here this morning. I have been reading based on the previous input which was that we were going to take this book slowly. While I have read well ahead of the two chapters, there is no way that I will have the time to even near the finish of this voluminous book by the fifteenth. It has been my past experience that when this happens I fall so far behind that I also tend to drop out of the discussion. I usually do however, come in regularly to read the posts and keep up that way...silently. Whichever way the group decides to go, I will be here one way or another. I wonder however how many other BC members have been reading this book planning on doing it slowly starting on the fifteenth?

As for reading with or without a leader we have had success or not using each method. Obviously using a leader depends very much on the leader. I tend to ignore the questions but I believe some people like them as they give them a direction.

Well, now, Helen, I don't want to do without you. Perhaps, since we all seem amenable, we could take it in sections and try to discuss what we come upon. I reread the first 101 pages this morning, so much there I want to talk about.

If we could stretch ourselves to 200 pages a week, which would really take us up thru Chapter 8, could we do that? In that fashion we'd finish in a month.

If we do 100 pages a week, we'd take two months.

We do not have a Discussion Leader for this one?

We, of course, are all free to bring up anything at any time we like.

I am very interested to hear how others have approached it, Jim, can you get a copy of the "review," one man's opinion is as good as anothers, but I always like to suss out what the competition is doing.

I took the liberty this morning of asking some rather pointed questions of a person quite familiar with the environs of the first 100 pages, and find that there are some inaccuracies in the text, after all, as has been written in the press, so will be interested to bring them up.

HOW LONG do you want to take this one? If we go a long time, will that be a problem, or do you want to finish in 3 weeks?

Ginny

Ginny: I will do my best to keep up with whatever the club members have decided. Do what you think is best. As I said before, I'll be here either participating by posting or by reading said posts. Looking forward to the discussion. Thanks for your concern kiddo!

OK, here's what we've decided to do. Each participant may feel free to bring up any theme or thread or any part of the book he or she likes, but for the sake of some semblance of order we'll take a particularly close look at the first two chapters on the 15th, and then the next week cover thru page 107 (these do seem like natural breaks) and from then on we'll go as we please.

This will allow people to join us, Charles's site from the NY Times is marvelous, and as soon as I can get Megan's site up there, up it goes.

There is SO much in this book, just in the first two chapters alone, I'm really looking forward to our exchange!

Ginny

Has anybody noticed this? I used to be able to go to various news media and retrieve past book reviews. Now they all appear to be charging for the archival material. The only one of the newspapers that I tried and succeeded with has been the New York Times. Anyone else have any suggestions on this?

Helen, you can still find book reviews on the USAToday site. I just checked the review for this book (#89 I think it was).

Larry

Larry;

Thanks so much for your input. It's so good to have another resource. I am sure there must be others,will have to make the time to look for them. If not I guess I could try to go cold turkey on the electronics and head for the public library for my information!

Many thanks to Megan Breen for that excellent new interview in the heading, between that one and Charles' wonderful NY Times sites, we can get some great insights into what Wolfe was TRYING to do, they are fascinating!

And thanks as always to our Larry, who made my botched up html page readable!

Ginny

NORTH SHORE LONG ISLAND NY

Sounds good to me...look forward to exchange of ideas on the l5th

Bettilu

Bettilu, how marvelous, we look forward to seeing you here, and Jim, don't give up, you can still come in towards the end when the entire book will have been read and give us a day's worth of opinion, anyway.

This looks like a great group, hope to see you all and more on the 15th.

For my part, I cannot get the scene out of my mind about the "breakfast and the burglar alarm." I think that says SO much about men and women and aging, can't WAIT to get to it, could spend a week on IT alone.

Ginny

Funny you should mention the burgler alarm scene. I agree there is much to be discussed in the context of the story when we get going. However I couldn't help personalizing it and relating to it even though my lodgings become downright humble by comparison to the Croker life style (Doesn't everybody's with the possible exception of royalty... and here I thought I had known some monied people in my time). However in today's world many of us with considerably less money amd valuables to concern ourselves with than Charlie, do have security systems in our homes. There have been some scenes in my own house where the alarm has gone off accidentally, usually through our own momentary lapses, not too unlike Charlies, which are really quite funny...only in retrospect of course.

I found that "breakfast and burglar alarm" scene hilarious! I thought the whole thing had a delightful "Thurberesque" quality to it. Reminded me of a piece of Thurber's, "The night the bed fell on Grandpa".

This book is so chocked full of juicy discussion areas. I am really enjoying it.

Eddie

Hi All; Reluctantly started this book the other nite cause all your posts have been so enthusiastic and I'm already up to chapt.6.Can't put it down.I don't usually lean toward 700 pg. books(I don't have the patience)but this one's exceptional!

I don't understand the reading schedule. The first week we do the prologue and chapters 1 @ 2,which takes us to pg.58.The next week we start at pg.1 and go to pg.107. ??????

Hi Walter:

Yes,it is a good read isn't it. I've also read more than I expected to already as I'm finding it quite absorbing.

As for the reading schedule. Yes, the first week we read the prologue and chapters I and II which takes us to page 58. The following week we start at pg 59 or chapter III and take it to 107 or the end of chapter IV. I believe that's the plan. Happy reading!

Hello All,

I've been fascinated by your Man in Full comments ever since I discovered this wonderful site - I've already read the book (and subsequently passed it on to family members) but I can see that I'm going to have to re-read some of it just to keep up. Eddie, I agree that the alarm scene definitely had a Thurberesque tone - it also reminded me of broad English comedy - almost Monty Python. Wolfe certainly has a way of putting the reader into the scene.

Am I missing something? I can't tell what time the discussion begins on the 15th. Really looking forward to it.

Sarah:

Welcome to the book club. First one here on the fifteenth...jump right in and begin posting about any aspect of the reading that has caught your interest. I think we have a really good group for this one.

Sarah, welcome to the discussion. Unlike face to face book clubs, the neat thing about our book discussions is that we can participate any time day or night. We read what has been written since our last visit, add our own comments and then come back later to see further responses and continue the discussion. We do not try to be here at the same time as someone else. Our starting date is just intended to give us some structure and we usually take a month on each book in the BC Online, unless the discussion needs to continue. Very flexible.

I will be looking forward to seeing your comments.

Larry

Hello, and welcome to our brand new discussion of A Man in Full ! I am not here, despite appearances to the contrary, but am in New York City, our Larry has very kindly posted this for me-- can't wait to get back on Thursday and read all your comments!

We have no discussion leader in this one, and no topics for discussion in the heading: we're braving new ground. Please feel free to bring to our Roundtable here all the topics and themes, threads and ideas you found interesting so we can all react to them.

As promised, we'll start by concentrating our attention on the first two chapters this week, (see the tentative schedule in the heading) but you can and should bring up any thoughts that struck you about this book at any time. Some of us just need a rudimentary outline for reference and intense scrutiny.

So let's jump right in! To begin at the beginning, what jumped out at you from the first? We've a world to discuss in these first few pages, here are my thoughts for openers:

What does a man in "Full " mean? To me the entire first hundred pages are full of the definition of what it means to be a real man….but whose definition is it, and is the author "having us on?" Is there just a BIT too much macho in the portrayal of Charlie Croker as he fans his back muscles?

Are there really only two kinds of men as mused by the banker Peepgass?

Did you pause at all over the names?

"Croker"--a homespun kind of sack?
"ArmHOLSTER"--
"PeepGASS"---

Did you think the author was hinting around here?

Did you think the spelling of "Turpmtine" was camp?

What is meant by the cover illustration of the eye peeping out behind the paper cover?

How about the characterizations? Do you find them realistic? Do you know anyone who sheds his accent as he gets nearer "home?

I am fascinated by the definitions of what it means to be a "manly man" in this book: on page 5,9, and 15, for starters. I wonder why nothing is said about mental prowess, except in the contrast of the Wiz and Croker??

I wonder what Wolfe is SAYING?

Oh and there's just so much more. I'm getting up a bunch of questions to ask Wolfe, we may never get an answer, but that won't stop me from trying. Maybe that excellent URL in the heading from Charlie will tell us. I wonder what Wolfe has against bankers? I wonder if bankers consider us, the debtors, "s….heads? " Do any of you know any loan officers?

And last, but not least,

Why, do you suppose, was Peepgass afraid after humiliating Croker?

Can't wait to see what you all think on these or any other subjects when I get in on Thursday,

Ginny

This apropos of absolutely NOTHING but I couldn't help imagining who would play the movie characters - anyone envision actor William H. Macy as Peepgass? I definitely think that Wolfe is having us on - used as many stereotypical personnas as he could. A man in full - full of what? I doubt that Wolfe expects readers to take him literally - he's obviously having too much fun.

Hi everyone:I think the title is the theme. MANHOOD ,what it is and what it's worth.

Near the bottom of page 5."When he was here at Turpmtine...he was no longer merely a real estate developer he was...a man."

The testosterone is heavy here folks and it's interesting to compare Charlie Croaker with Sherman McCoy (Bonfires). More comment about that as the discussion progresses.

Yes, Maida - William H. Macy would be Positively Perfect as Peepgas. And Jimmy Johnson would HAVE to do a walk-on as Buck McNutter with his "curiously fussy silver-blond hairdo"

Charlie

In November, Tom Wolfe read selections from his new novel at Town Hall in New York. There is a clickable in the heading to go to the NY Times site where you can listen to selections from this reading. I recommend listening to some of it - it gives you a good indicator of Wolfe's intentions. I always like to hear an author (or poet) read his own work. Plus there was one thing that was driving me crazy - how to pronounce Charlie's name. CROCK-ER or CROAK-ER?? Well it's CROW-KER. I think of this name, by the way as a man "crowing" his successes by the conspicuous consumption of his lifestyle. Ginny I didn't get the "homespun sack" reference, but would be interested to hear what others think of the choice of names. Some of them are quite funny and tongue in cheek. More on those later, but Peepgas is a good one. Almost like Pipsqueak, but somehow, even more insignificant, and even embarrasing - like a little peep of gas escaping from someone in the room!! I don't think TW could have chosen a more demeaning name.

He talks about his journalistic approach to a work. He "picks" a setting or "milieu" which interests him and researches it. It is interesting to hear him tell of his visit to a quail plantation in SW Georgia. One of the lines in the book is lifted right from his visit, when he was told by the plantation Owner as they were having a quail dinner how much each quail cost (based on the overhead, etc. etc.).

A Few years ago, I visited friends in Atlanta. One of the things my wife wanted to do was visit a Plantation. That is one of the 'touristy' things that is quite popular in Atlanta. One of our friends told us that we didn't want to go THERE. That was 'redneck' country! SO we never did. But that really was an indicator, confirmed over and over in this book, that there is a real consciousness of TERRITORY and SECTIONS and CLASS in Atlanta that is very apparent. We DID do a driving self-tour of Atlanta, another very popular touristy thing to do. Especially through Buckhead. I remember the huge houses and the long driveways and the one thing that I found really curious was the HUGE brick beehives at the bottom of many of those driveways, enclosing a mailbox. They were quite unique - I have never seen them elsewhere that I can recall.

Thanks Larry and Helen - I guess it's obvious I've never done this before - online or in groups. Reading has always been a very solitary activity for me, but now that I'm here, I'm excited about hearing everyone's perspectives. It may take me awhile to warm up, however. . .

Charles,

Of course, Jimmy Johnson!! Now, who for old Charlie? Nick Nolte? No, too young and too rough around the edges for Charlie in Buckhead. If Charlie is the essence of MANHOOD (by whose scale?) then is Peepgass the antithesis? I will look up the Wolfe reading, thanks. Maida

If we're casting for the role of "Boss" Croaker,I'd like to recommend Brian Dennahy(?)...he's currently doing a brilliant job as Willie Loman in "Death of a Salesman" on B'Way and I think he'd be perfect as Croaker.

Brian Dennehy (but only if it's "made for tv"). I had thought of him too, last night. Great. Now we only need an Executive Producer!!

Maida: Yes. Peepgas IS the antithesis of Croker. Now I don't know, if in TW's mind, Croker is the epitome of Manhood or not. Maybe just his impression that Croker is a certain representation of Southern Manhood, at least by a certain segment?? But Peepgas!! The name says that he's just an afterthought of a man - at least in the world of Croker. Croker says "Fe Fi Fo Fum". Peepgas says, well, Peepgas makes hardly a Peep! Barely a ripple. A blip on Cap'n Charlie's radar.

Sarah T: Yes reading IS a solitary experience, or at least always HAS been. But now it's not - and it's great! It's a whole NEW experience. I think you'll like it.

Charlie (don't call me Croker) Wendell

Sarah, don't hesitate to join in with any thoughts you have on the story. As you see by my posting below, I don't worry a whit about the fact that what I am writing is not a masterpiece. Just want to share my thoughts with others and always find it an interesting experience. Everyone's participation is invited and welcomed.

Walter and Charlie, I think Brian Dennehy would be perfect for Charlie. When I say Maida's posting and started thinking about that he was the one I thought about.

I have lived in Altanta since 1980 (excluding a 5 year stint in the Nation's capitol). I found I could relate very well to the setting in the book. The streets, the Driving Club, the counties and states of development are excellent. North of downtown Atlanta is an area called Buckhead that is very trendy. The Governor's mansion and many other mansions are in the West Paces Ferry area.

Believe me the description of Freaknik was very realistic and is held every spring when we may have 200,000 or more college kids come to town. They close down the streets in certain parts of town and the people who live there get very upset.

Larry

Good morning all' I see we're off and running.

Walter: I like your casting of Brian Dennehy. I can see him as Charley C.(definitely not you CW). Actually you've probably fixed it so that I will see him (Dennehy) all the time now, as I read the book.

Charlie: Thanks for the tip on the audio at NYT. I had gotten the book review,but will go back and listen.

Sarah,Maida: I think you are in for a really good time. Reading a book and then discussing it with friends is wonderful!

I have seen Wolfe interviewed a couple of times. On one occasion he spoke of his heart attack and the depression that plagued him following the surgery. Wolfe admitted that until that time he had been a person who was far from enamoured with the field of Psychiatry or Psychology or anything to do with the therapeutic process. It was during this period that he became so desperate that he called upon a psychiatrist he knew and he turned out to be the man who brought him through his severe illness. This doctor called him every day, some time several times in a day and they would have their sessions on the phone. If I recall correctly, the doctor is the head of Psychiatry at Johns Hopkin's and this book is dedicated to him. Needless to say he now admits to having a healthy respect for the profession.

I also believe I read somewhere that Wolfe originally had started the book with New York as the locale and because he had used it extensively before, he decided he was bored with it. He said the hardest material he had to put aside was the piece on the art world in which he has a keen interest.

We do have a panorama set before us a he addresses himself to contemporary America in general and more specifically to the major southern city of Atlanta. What about that scene at PlannersBanc? I could just feel the tension as it built. What did you think of Harry Zale,"the workout artiste"and how he played with CC? Did it evoke any sympathy for Croker in you? Just in those first two chapters,the bank scene, the quail hunt, the trophy wife,the opulence of the life style as we have been told thus far... wow there is so much to look at.

Okay, it's Brian Dennehy. I'm reviewing and can't NOT see this actor. How about Denzel Washington for Roger Too White? We're having a snow day from school here in New Hampshire and am reveling in all of your most excellent comments!

Larry, thanks much for the info on Atlanta. It's been years since I was there (no memory of the Driving Club or Buckhead) but recall what a lovely city it is. Freaknik must be a horror show! Lived thru years of spring break in Ft. Lauderdale.

I agree, Brian Dennehy would be perfect for Charlie..the first actor I thought of was Broderick Crawford (gone now, I assume) maybe because he played Huey Long.

Wolfe's description of Charlie catching the rattlesnake actually made me wince - I could barely read it, he made it absolutely real to me. Unfortunately you can't "cover your eyes" when reading a book as I do in movies if something makes me squeamish.

Eileen Megan

Eileen,

The rattlsnake thing is bad enough but wait until you reach the horse breeding chapter - talk about wanting to cover my eyes. Got to hand it to Wolfe, though - he certainly excels at description.

Hi book lovers. Been away too long. Really enjoyed the discussion of Cold Mountain and am anxious for your fine comments on "Man...". Just started reading so hope to enter in soon. Jim

Hi, James - Glad you're joining in. As you can see, there is a very leisurely pace set up so you're not really behind at all. I, like Maida and Eileen are sort of snowed in today, so I've taken this opportunity to finish the book (last two Chapters!)

Charlie

Hi: I find in Wolfe's book,two essential subjects that still resonate from Bonfires.. money and sex and the connection between them,

"The lawns rose up from the street like big green breasts, and at the top of each breast was a house big enough to be called a mansion."

Does anyone think the term "saddlebags" will now enter the popular language?

Maida, the worst chapter for me was the ugly prison scene with the kid - I threw the book away from me in disgust and swore I wouldn't read another word if there was much more of that! Well, of course, there wasn't but I can't remember the last time a writer put me smack dab on the scene quite the way Wolfe did.

Eileen Megan

Eileen,

I liked the way you phrased that - Wolfe put you right into the scene. Guess that's what sets him apart from others - and is probably why is took him over 10 years to complete the book. There are parts of the book that I really detested, but I couldn't put it down. The ending is a LARGE disappointment, didn't you think? It just sort of fizzles out and what resolution there is isn't satisfactory.

Yes, the ending is somewhat of a clunker isn't it? I think the length of time it takes Wolfe to complete a novel has something to do with the way he writes. It seems everything must be personally observed or experienced by him. He's a reporter after all. And everything he experiences must be synthesized into a whole. This is quite a task, don't you think? Helen brings up a good example, reporting on Wolfe's heart attack. This is all there in Charlie's recovery from knee replacement surgery. Also, Helen, in the NYT audio reading, I seem to recall Wolfe saying that he had the germ of an idea to write about those moguls of today that own big ranches or plantations, especially after his visit to a plantation, but of course, New York wasn't the setting for that, so he moved it all to Atlanta. It's a wonder he ever completes a novel. But he cobbles quite an interesting work together. But how to end? After all, his observations, being a reporter, never cease. And what a reporter. If there is something, some observation in the novel with which you are intimately familiar, you'll know what an incredibly precise eye he has. And as Eileen points out, he really can put you right in a scene.

I don't know if "saddlebags" will enter the lexicon, Ed, but when they appeared it was quite a moment, eh? Now there's an example of something of which I know nothing. Workouts (in the banking sense). But, I'll just bet this is just the way they go, right down to the lifeless Dracaena in the corner.

The rattlesnake scene reminds me so much of my many trips to the Miami Serpentarium as a school kid - those seemed like mandatory yearly events to see them "milk" the rattlesnakes!

And, Maida, I love Denzel as an actor, but would he pass the "brown paper Bag" test??

Helen: One of the first things I noticed was how unlikable I found Charlie immediately - but then in the PlannersBanc workout I realized I was feeling sympathy for him. And I kinda resented Wolfe for being a bit manipulative.

WOLFE'S KEEN EYE: Two small things stood out in Chapter 2. (1) I just loved Wolfe's take on how Bank mergers have caused the use of new names "in keeping with the new lean, mean fashion of jamming names together with a capital letter sticking up in the middle…" (PlannersBanc). Heck, we just had a big one today (only the latest) in Boston, merging the merged BankBoston with Fleet Bank to be called ??? Something cute and catchy I'm sure (2) the description of Harry Zale's style of left-handed writing was really right-on.

Larry: I had overlooked that you are in Atlanta You have to tell us more!!

Charlie

Remember that you must behave in life as at a dinner party. Is anything brought around to you? Put out your hand and take your share with moderation. Does it pass by you? Don't stop it. Is it not yet come? Don't stretch your desire towards it, but wait till it reaches you. ZOUNDS!! By Zeus, I think I've got the spark!!

Epictetus The Enchiridion

I agree Charles about TW's ability to set the scene. I loved the way he described that dingy conference room where the workout session took place -- especially as contrasted with the opulence of the rest of the bank's office. It was just so . . . insulting! I really did feel mad on Charlie's behalf! And the indignity of the sattlebags -- I'll bet he had never sweat like that from stress before.

I thought the discussion of the black upper class and the emphasis on skin tone was also really interesting. That's just not something that gets discussed much out here in California. Nor do we have anything even resembling Freaknic - I'd heard of it, but just barely. The whole world in Atlanta was so unlike anything I've ever experienced that it just fascinated me to read about it.

Who was that actor who played in Deliverance, The Big Easy and a bunch of other movies? Ned Beatty? I visualized him as Charlie throughout the book.

Where I come from the term "Saddlebags" refers to those ugly bulges around the waist aka "Love Handles", but I like TW's definition much better! I'm amazed to see that "A Man in Full" hasn't made the NYT best seller list...yet.

I just did a quick search on Freaknic and thought you might find the following article that appeared after last year's event somewhat enlightening.

Freaknik too lewd, crude for Atlanta?

Another article on Freaknik 99 provides some further background. Here is the first paragraph:

"It has been an incredible journey from the first FREAKNIK back in 1982, when seventy-five people gathered for a spring break party. Seventeen years later, FREAKNIK is the nation's largest and most exciting single event for African American college students. This year it's anticipated FREAKNIK will attract over 450,000 visitors to Atlanta Centennial Olympic Park, April 16th through the 18th. Additionally, via the Freaknik Websites, the Internet will bring people together from across the country and around the world to celebrate FREAKNIK ‘99." Source: Freaknik

The scene with Roger "Too" White certainly isn't far-fetched.

Larry

Walter, it is and has been on the NY Times bestseller list...

I find it very disconcerting that some are sticking to the schedule for discussion and others are roaming all over...I too have read the entire book and yesterday I reread the prologue and the first two chapters so that I could contribute to the discussion....could we abide by the ground rules that were set up or change the rules so that those of us who focus on and within the parameters can be a part of this...?

Bettilu

Bettilu, I appreciate your comments and concerns. However, in our book discussions we have always encouraged free exchanges of information and while we often have a schedule as we do for this book, it is difficult for some of us to remember what was contained in certain chapters and therefore it is acceptable for any comments to be made. I know in my own case, I read the book from the library and had to return it as others were on the waiting list. While I am going to try to follow along with the discussion to the extent I can be reminded of what actions were occurring in each chapter, I am certain I won't be able to stay exactly within the pages of the designated chapters. We put in the table of characters in the book to help some of us, who may forget names like I do, be able to recall the names. Hope this explanation is helpful. As it says in the heading above "Please feel free to comment on any and all aspects of the book at any time!"

Larry

Maida, I think I sort of "fizzled" out by the end of the book and just sort of accepted the ending. It might be fun, when we get to the end of the discussion, to have posters suggest ideas on endings that they would have preferred - the more bizarre the better!

I'm trying to stay within the parameters described above and if I mention an event that happens later on in the book, I will try not to give details, just a generalized comment.

Eileen Megan

Sarah T - Let's talk a little about this "black upper class" and skin tone. I have seen many references to this in past readings (skin tone) and find it pretty interesting. I suppose it goes back to the "house Negro" phenomenon, the offspring of the plantation owners, and the era of trying to "pass for white." I had NOT heard the phrase "brown paper bag test" before, however. What about anyone else? Bettilu? There's a lot about this in Chapter 1 (Chocolate Mecca). What did you make of it? There is a new book out which is getting a lot of reviews, although most of them are luke-warm that mines this very subject: Our Kind of People, Inside America's Black Upper Class by Lawrence Otis Graham.

Freaknik - Thanks for the research Larry. That photo in your news link could have been an illustration right out of the book! I remember it was all over the news last year. Would it be possible for freaknik to take place in any other American city? Would it be more likely for a similar 'happening' of mostly white college students to take place in most any American City? It's quite another well-drawn image by Wolfe, the Piedmont Driving Club looking down from their lawn party in their tuxedos at the Chocolate Mecca gathering! I went to the Univ. of Florida and went to Daytona every year. It was pretty wild (the 60's) but I think I can safely assume that it is much wilder now. I think that's just the way it is. Anyway. April 16th. Only 30 more days Larry!!!

Charlie

LARRY, Thank you for your thoughtful comments regarding how we should be discussing this book and BETTILU, mea culpa. I am guilty of straying from the chapters at hand and will try to avoid this in future postings. I certainly don't wish to spoil the fun for others who haven't completed the whole thing. EILEEN, you are from Brockton? I went to college in Norton - not too far from your town - before the place went co-ed.

Charles: I did listen to the NYT audio of TW talking about and then reading from his book. Not only was it amazing to me to sit in front of my computer while doing something else and listen to him, I found I heard things while listening that I hadn't heard in quite the same way while I was reading to my self. I recommend the experience to those of you who haven't gone to the site yet.

Larry: Thanks for the links to Freaknik. The newspaper article that went along with the photo certainly made it sound as if Atlanta has a huge problem to solve in taming this event.

As for the BPBT… I have had the occasion to have some blacks of a lighter color tell me that they were outcasts in their own community. The darker skinned blacks shun them and they are not accepted into the white community. As a result some of these people are isolated because of their color.

Here I thought I was doing so well (around pg.250) and you smart alecks have all finished the book. Although I have heard others say they were disappointed with the ending of the book PLEASE don't reveal it yet. I want to be surprised. Then we can use Eileen's idea of coming up with our own ideas for better endings.

Can you imagine that the hunting season at Turpmtine and it's 29,000 acres was a mere 13 weeks! It boggles the mind to try to imagine that kind of spending for one person's personal pleasure. I believe Wolfe on recounting his personal experience at a plantation dinner after the quail hunt was told by his host that the quail he was eating(single portion) cost somewhere under $7000.00.

Walter - What was so funny about The Saddlebags, was that at first, one didn't know that they were talking about! And then they appeared. And THEN the "Lenders Cactus"!! Too much! Also, he does a good job here on Peepgas. He really lives up to his name. The hanger on almost who observes the big man being taken down, but hangs back until he thinks it's safe and then attempts his little pathetic jabs - only to be taken aback by just a glance from Croker. That's really good.

But back to the question of 'Full'. Ginny's asked: "What does a man in "Full " mean?" (I feel the need to get this answered before she gets back!!!!!!) HELP!!. I still don't know its meaning. I've got a few guesses, but I'm not really convinced that I know. Actually, I don't think I like the title all that much. I think it's meant to be descriptive, but……unless someone can come up with a good one…..(an AHA! Moment). A Man if Full Regalia? A Man in Full Bloom? It's got to be IN something - so a Man who's CUP is full doesn't cut it.

It was interesting to note Roger Too White's defense of Booker T. Washington (in Chapter 1). I just saw Ragtime this weekend, and Booker T. Washington was one of the prominent historical figures in the Musical adaptation of Doctorow's book. He came across as pretty much the same figure as in the mind of Roger Too White: Make something of yourself first, and THEN come talk to me!

Hello Helen - We were 'cross-posting'! The brown paper bag test cuts both ways doesn't it? I think that's an extremely interesting point, and without giving any detail away, we'll see Roger's reaction later in the book to a kind of acceptance he didn't think he wanted, or needed (the title of Chapter 31 is Roger Black) And from listening to the Wolfe, it seems that the very idea of a quail plantation, its tremendous expense along with its very limited use, was one of the things that drove Wolfe to the need to write about his subject. It really IS mind boggling.

Charlie

Many years ago I was traveling with a co-worker who was African American. In the course of our conversation he told me that the feelings between African Americans of different skin hues was really as strong or stronger than between African Americans and whites. I remember being very shocked at this as it seemed so self-defeating.

I thought the scene with the bankers really presented them in a very bad light. Wonder how much truth there was in that scene where Croker was confronted and the bankers seemed to really enjoy the experience?

Larry

Charles,

Your mention of the "cactus" and "peepgas" had me looking at other ways Wolfe uses names in this satire of modern American life.

Charlie "Croker" is in a way a croaker and also very much a Georgia "cracker"

I liked most of all the "PlannersBanc" which Wolfe uses to sum what what Atlanta is doing in the book namely reaching for a new facade to cover up its past and present blemishes.

It is trying to be a "city in full" and like the irony in "man in full" it is very empty in fact in terms of the richness and depth of human qualities.

The bank could even be called the "plottersBanc" to be more accurate but then it wouldn't carry that concealed reference to "planters" that reaches back to Atlanta's heritage in all its fullness with both the positive and negative aspects of that past.

Arnold,

If you will allow me some of the scatological tone of the novel (It is hard to use scatology anymore in a satirical way since it has become so common a fixture in everyday language) Charlie is also very much a "crocker" as in a " a crock of".

He is also essentially always pushing his maleness as in his shooting the male "bobs"- that macho calling of one's shots (remember Babe Ruth and Ali) and in the snake epiosode- maybe more intense now that he seems to be losing it sexually (I think he is symbolized by the stallion at the end of the horse breeding episode- broken down by his efforts in that department)

In rereading that first chapter the relationship between Serena and Elizabeth takes on some meaning as well in terms of sexual matters as it appears that they are engaging in "Monica" talk. Neither one is taping their "girl talk". I suspect, however, if Serena had taped it (and subsequent times when we see them talking together) she would have used it later to help maintain Charley's position and her Queen or Princess role in elite Atlanta society. It is hard to do a satire when real life these days is even more bizarre than the exaggeration the satirist can develop.

Charles - Yes, I saw the author of the book about the black upper class interviewed and I remember thinking that I was hearing more about this issue in a short period of time than I'd heard for the rest of my life. I'd really like to read that book.

I can't come up with anything better for "A Man in Full" than you have. I figured it was a sardonic reference (i.e., not meant to be taken seriously). Sort of like "Master of the Universe" from Bonfire.

NORTH SHORE,LONG ISLAND,NEW YORK

Larry, thank you for the explanation...I comprehend and can relate.

Charles, you're from Mass ? I wouldn't expect a Yankee to have any comprehension of the brown paper bag test...the strata in the Black Communities is very complex and of course interrelated with the entire southern environment...remember we are in Atlanta...part of Sheridan's March to the sea, etc...the complications of the almost caste system in the white community and the highly involved societal changes during the War and subsequent reconstruction period are the roots of what is there today..a really interesting and continuing saga...and very much our own...an American Heritage for both colors. complete with all the pluses and minuses...also remember this is the deep South (Georgia) even today with all the influx of Yankees, etc. holds its traditions dear...think of Gone with the Wind...the plantation life before and after the War between the States and the strong tie to the land and property...O'Hara's Tara...an extension of a man not too dissimilar to Crocker...does that scan?

Let us not forget that Crocker comes from crackerdom...is more or less a self made man and knows underneath that he will never be accepted in The Society...We are not dealing here with Modern American Life just this particular part of it. Reflective of the whole but a very complicated and interesting microcosm.

In reference to Serena/Elizabeth conversation....they are definitely wannabes who latch on to men like Crocker and know that they will never reign in " Atlanta Society"...men and women alike know they are expendable and interchangeable.

I'll be back..ta ta...Bettilu

How many of us were compelled to lift the dust cover of the book, to see what lay beneath that enigmatic "cover"? I know I was. How many were surprised at what was behind this facade? The clear, vigilant eye looking out at the public was seen in full dimension...with all the facets that comprised man, exposed. His frailities, shortcomings and bulk brought together to show what comprised the "Man in Full".

I feel that is what Wolfe was doing with this book. He was using the book as a vehicle to compell people to look behind the surface of what we see in our fellow man. In full disclosure, every man is a composite of his beliefs, values, and environment. It shows, (by using extreme stereotypical sketches) all aspects of the man, that make up the whole.

I was particularly interested in the comparisons of different classes of people...blacks and whites...and how they were presented. The black college students at the Freaknik...their "accepted" arena for displaying their feelings of pride and ownership of their place in society...and ceremoniously acknowledging their roots...with their "in your face" attitudes. By comparison, Roger "too" White's being caught in the middle of it...with feelings of what...? It seems his main concern was being caught up in this, knowing it was throwing him off schedule. Then we see, when he was forced to look at these people...his people...his emotions ranged from disgust and embarrassment for them...all the way to a stirring, deep inside of him, of pride and respect of them. So many facets to a man...and how each one must gain control and power over their particular "rattlesnakes".

This is an awesome book and I am really enjoying it. But it does demand reading slowly, in order to pick up on everything. That's hard for me, as I am a fast reader and tend to lose interest in really detailed accounts...but Wolfe makes me want to know as much as I can about each character...and it is well worth the effort.

Eddie...(Who is just half way through the book and still re-reading most of that!)

Charlie's patronizing attitude towards his black employees reminded me of an episode when I lived in Florida in 1948. At that time there were still separate drinking fountains, bathrooms etc. I had a hot and heavy discussion with a young man who was studying to be a lawyer. As an 18 year old Massachusetts "liberal" I took issue with him on how blacks were treated in the south - he flabbergasted me with his response by saying all the race riots were in the north and southerners knew how to "handle" blacks, therefore no race riots. My, how times have changed, but not enough, I guess.

Charles An aside, I read Howie Carr in the Herald this morning he said Fleet Back and BankBoston's new name would be "Fleece Boston", there will be 5000 layoffs as a result of this merger.

Maida Yes, I've been through Norton many times and have seen that lovely college.

Eileen Megan

Hi everyone: Regarding Freaknic and does it happen anywhere else. Every summer in Philadelphia,Pa there is a gathering of black college students called the Greek Picnic.

Over the years it has become increasingly more crowded and more violent. Last summer there were several incidents of something called "whirling" in which a group of young males (drinking beer) would surround a female and strip off her clothes and grope the young lady.Several of these were recorded on video tape as well as tape of the police trying to quell various disturbances.

Several charges of "police brutality" were filed but never were substantiated. There was a big hue & cry about the entire event and some of the "old establishment" wanted the city to ban the event all together. The police have promised a stronger presence this year plus more input from the local African American community. There is to be tighter control on the use of alcohol this year,but a lot of the area residents avoid the event location at all costs.

I've read that Atlanta is mostly suburbs,or a collection of "edge cities."

My brother-in-law is a loan officer, but in a small independent bank, one of the few left, and just individual loans (personal and property loans). Larry, one can feel the truth in Wolfe's "workout" scene at least. Let's assume for the moment that, as Peepgass believes, there are two kinds of "Male Animals": (1) those who go into investment banking, real estate, etc. the risk takers and (2) the passive males - those who go into commercial banking and sit back and collect interest. With this view, you can imagine the pleasure of one of the "passive" types taking down one of the tigers, when the rare opportunity arises. Peepgas represents the essence of this type of passive male. Note his reaction when Croker leaves the conference at the end of Chapter 2 and casts an epithet at him: "…frozen, speechless, afraid to look into the eyes of anybody else in the room." He backs down with his tail between his legs like a hyena - much like the 'passive' position some dogs take with a more dominant one, roll over on your back with legs spread…

Arnold - speaking of names, my very favorite in the book is the most outlandish one of all and reminds me of the law firm on NPR's Car Talk: Dewey, Cheatem and Howe!! Roger Too White's firm is Wringer Fleasom & Tick - sounds like a firm that specializes in messy divorces - Wring-Her (out of every thing she's got), Fleece Him (out of all his worldly possessions) and Tick (then suck them BOTH dry)!!

Charlie

Jim: Good stuff. I like your take on the stallion episode. I missed that aspect all together. Right! I did notice the relationship between Serena and Elizabeth, even between Serena and Wally, (I believe there were others) and how it REALLY irritated Charlie.

Sarah T. - I think the author of that book (who is black and a Morehouse Man I believe) did an earlier book about an exclusive country club.

Bettilu - I'm LIVING in Mass. But I grew up in South Florida and visited my grandmother a lot as a youngster in Columbus, Georgia. I can still remember the cry of the street vendors wheeling their carts by her house along about suppertime: "Buttah beeeeeans! Ohhhhh-Kruh! She had a one armed black "yard-man", named Fletcher, who cut her lawn (push mower). Couldn't take my eyes off that! Even living in Miami, I remember my mother loading up all the ironing into the car and hauling it to the Miami ghetto…I think you'll find that many African-Americans (did I just read somewhere, was it in this book, that Jesse J coined that phrase for common use???) PREFER the South as far as race relations and will tell you that, in the South, they know where they stand, and that the racism of the North is much more troublesome. (It's St. Paddy's Day in South Boston!!). Bettilu, aren't the roots of the problem of which you speak really a form of Colonialism and don't we find very similar hold over patterns in post-colonial societies? Bettilu - keep that thought about wannabes parked in the back of your mind and pull it back out near the end of the book! "Men and women alike know they are expendable and interchangeable." Oh, yeah! Replaceable parts. Retreads.

Eddie Elliott - GREAT! Thank you! I've got the explanation that I can get behind for "A Man in FULL". (Ginny will be so proud of us!). You see, what I did wrong was, take OFF the dust cover right off as I started to read and missed that whole thing!! That's my excuse. Can I sell that? It's true. But yes, you see one clear eye through the flap and when you take it off there is the FULL face of the man and one eye is BLACKENED!!

GINNY READ EDDIE ELLIOTT POST #91!!

I have the strangest think keep happening to me. Whenever I read someone's post that starts "Charlie…" I think you're talking about ME and you're saying some PRETTY MEAN THINGS. I have to catch myself!!Eileen - Florida in 1948 huh? Pretty wild and wooly back then. We moved to South Florida when I was 6 months old in 1945. Yes, I remember the Florida East Coast Railroad's separate drinking fountains!

ED- You mentioned "edge cities". Wolfe mentions (in Chapter 3) a book called Edge City. Silly me, I’m reading a novel, so I though this was a made up book. Nope! It's real (you maybe knew that) - Edge City : Life on the New Frontier by Joel Garreau. Here's a short review by a reader from an Atlanta "edge city" (Alpharetta) -

colleran@worldnet.att.net from Alpharetta, GA , February 6, 1998 Terrific book on an extraordinary new city phenomenon Mr. Garreau writes an insightful and balanced book on the new 'cities' that are growing up almost overnight around our old cities. He has done some ground-breaking research on how this all got started and where it might be going. I especially like the balanced presentation that allows the reader to decide whether these new Edge Cities are a boon, a disaster or somewhere in between.

Charlie

For those of us stuck with library books that we couldn't take the cover off of, what is under the dust jacket? I keep trying to peek, but missed it.

I think much of what was said regarding race relations in the north is so true. I live in San Francisco -- supposedly one of the most liberal, tolerant, diverse cities in the country. Yet if you go to a place where all sorts of people congregate -- a shopping mall, say -- you realize the most folks are segregated in their own racial/ethnic groups. They're all there, but they're just not with each other.

So it's just a whole lot more insidious here.

Here's a social note from Boston. This Friday is the 8th Annual Mo' Better Gala (hosted by Spike Lee)- a $100/ticket fund raiser for Morehouse College in Atlanta.

Sarah - The dust jacket has a cut-out "O" in "TOM" through which peers an eye. Taking the jacket off reveals the FULL face of a man (Charlie C.)but the right eye is blackened, and closed shut. Isn't the TW photo in the header (which is from the inside flap) a mirror of the position of the Croker image on the book cover????

Charlie

For an illustration of what Eddie Elliot and others are talking about in terms of the jacket and cover click below:

Charley Use your return key on browser to come back here after viewing the illustration.

Just finished Chapt.XI,"This is-Not Right" (Yes,I know,I'm a very slow reader) about poor Conrad's experience trying to reclaim his towed car.I promise I will NEVER,NEVER again park my car on the street when we go into NYC...tow away zones or otherwise! What a hair raising experience!

Regarding message #94 by Charles Wendall: I loved the analysis of the law firm that Roger Too White worked at. I am disappointed that I didn't take it slow the first time I read it and figure that out myself.

In regard to the comment about being more "comfortable" in the South, I can't remember the author's name but the book was "Five Smooth Stones" which detailed a young black man's experiences in the South and the "hidden" racism in the North-very interesting book.

Conrad's wild and wooly experience with his towed car was unbelievable.

Eileen Megan

WOW, Charlie, I am proud of all of you, what a forum we have here, welcome, newcomers Arnold, Sarah, Maida, and Bettilu, and back again, Jim Miles, and everyone else, you've done a great job so far! Very exciting beginning, and I hope you noticed our Book Groups made the NY Times today?

Is that a black eye, Charlie? What can it mean to depict Croker with a black eye? I thought he was winking, tho what the cover artist chooses to depict might not be what the author wants, anyway, unless Wolfe has approval of that, too.

I love everybody's takes takes on the word "Croker," I think Croker is a fine name for Charlie, since a croker sack is: "chiefly Southern:a sack of a coarse material (as burlap)."

There are not too many things more humble or elemental than a croker sack, and I don't think it was an accident that Wolfe used that term for the original "elemental man," Charlie Croker, and all your other takes on the name are marvelous, too.

Eddie Marie, I loved your post on the full disclosure, that was splendid!! I'm sticking to the schedule pretty rigidly so I don't know how much has been disclosed yet, but I'm going to watch it carefully. Likewise my audio is not functioning, so I need to hold off a bit, I guess, in my assertions till I see if I can find out how Wolfe reads his own book.

I do agree with Ed that some sort of definition of manhood is being attempted here, for what purpose remains to be seen. For the benefit of those who have returned books to the library, the more we can quote the better it will be (likewise, thanks, Larry, for that continuing list of characters in the headng).

Here's a quote: "According to a tradition as old as the plantations themselves, a quail shoot was a ritual in which the male of the human species acted out his rold of hunter, provider, and protector... "(p. 15).

"No, this was the South,. You had to be man enough to deserve a quail plantation. You had to be able to deal with man and beast, in every form they came in, with your wits, your bare hands, and your gun." (p. 9).

When you read quotes such as those, what is your reaction? Is this a figment of Wolfe's imagination, do you think? An exaggeration? Satire or humor at its fullest? Do you know anyone who hunts, and if so, would they find those two quotes amusing or satirical? Is there a difference in what a "man" is, depending upon the part of the country he comes from? ("Southern?")

We have Our Man in Atlanta, Larry, who can answer our questions on Atlanta, do we have anybody here who is actually from South Georgia? Have you ever seen these "quail" plantations or visited one yourself?

Have you noticed how many movies lately are "Armageddon" type movies? What will YOU be doing when it's down to the bare elements--could you pick up your gun? Do we live in a world pretty much cushioned off from the type of thing we're participating in when the book opens? 29,000 acre plantations? Teams of horses and men?

I do have some little nit picking things that I found incongruous and wonder if any of the rest of you blinked at all at these?

On the subject of "buckshot" I have asked a person I know who does own land for quail shooting in South Georgia a question or two I had and here are the first two answers:

The word "buckshot" is mentioned on page 11 and page 5, "The spread of buckshot a .410 fired was smalled than any other shotgun's, and with quail...."

Buckshot is not used on quail shoots, so here Wolfe was inaccurate. Apparently it is possible to shoot only the male birds, but here, (said with a look of challenging disbelief) only by very good shots----

How do you all feel about hunting, at all? Does it, for you, personify the male experience or are we so urbanized that it seems cave man- like? Obviously Charlie Croker felt that it meant something, remember how humiliated and angry he was when Serena, his trophy wife, never even noticed what "two...old men...had or hadn't accomplished with their shotguns." (p. 13)

And some of you said you didn't like Charlie Croker at first? Why was that? What aspect of his personality turned you off?

OK: here's yet another thing I found incongruous: if I am a banker and I have a debtor in default to me, I don't think insulting him and demeaning him and trying to humiliate him will make him more likely to pay me. I don't care if he is in debt to me, there are ways and ways to shuffle debt, there is Bankrupcy Court, no? And so if I drag him thru the dirt, where will he hide it and how much less will I get? That doesn't make any sense to me at all.

Another thing I couldn't follow was the suspenders with the skull and crossbones? I doubt that would make any more "half moons" appear on a man's shirt, do you? Do you really think that somebody with Croker's moxie who had bulled (note all the similies to bulls) his way to the top would be humiliated by such a Geek playing at "boot camp"? I don't think so. I think in real life, when Harry Zale held up his hand like he did, Croker, whose own father lost fingers and who HAD served in Vietnam (Purple Heart, Bronze Star) (p.78) would have come back in his face, probably physically. I mean, Peepgas is certainly scared to death by Charlie's one word curse, "A......" What did he expect Croker to do, shuffle out, hat in hand?

I think if you establish a character with certain character attributes, then you have to be consistent in that character's reactions, but I haven't heard the audio and will try remedy that today.

I thought this was an interesting sentence (on the tycoons of the world, the Charlie Crokers): "Using their stronger wills, greater guile, and higher levels of testosterone..." (p.47)

Is that true, do you think? ARE the Ted Turners of the world, the Donald Trumps, just more MAN than anybody else?

I've always been personally interested in what makes some people rise to fame or prominence and others of much more worth never shine at all. Isn't there a quotation about the best lacking all conviction, etc....? I wonder in these two chapters, these 58 pages, if we have found any one at all likeable to whom we can relate or if Wolfe is exercising his own leveler at all the tycoons, bankers, politicians, lawyers and the other people an aesthete might not appreciate?

PS: I never have understood what big forearms are supposed to mean to a man? Even Popeye the Sailor has forearms like hams. Is this yet another satirical superficial indicator (on page 42 and others), somehow, of manhood?

Ginny

Okay, you win. I learned my lesson and will never (I promise) read the whole book first because I'm missing out on too much fun. I will also BUY the book so that I may scribble thoughts in the margins as I used to do in college.

Has anyone remarked on the extreme contrasts between the effete Tom Wolfe and the MAN'S MAN, Charlie Croker? Doesn't anyone suspect that Wolfe is having enormous fun with this and wonder what the author would make of our erstwhile attempts at valid criticism?

Ginny and Maida - I think TW very much has his tongue planted firmly in cheek with his definitions of Southern Manhood. And Maida, your comment, once again convinces me that the end flap photo (the one in the heading) of Tom Wolfe is a counterpoint to Charlie's image on the book cover (click on Jim's scan to compare). Wolfe surely has a twinkle in his eye as he poses Charlie style 3/4 profile. I think he's having a GREAT ole' time!

Ginny - No, I don’t think we meet anyone until Chapter 5 (Suicidal Freezer Unit) when Conrad appears that we meet anyone that is really "likeable". I agree, if what you are saying is that Wolfe uses satire to level "tycoons, bankers, politicians, lawyers" - then he brings in hard working Conrad Hensley as the foil to them all.

As far as the 'work-out', I found it believable, and didn't find Charlie's reaction at all inconsistent with his character. I think Wolfe addressed the perceived inconsistencies. Remember this IS boot camp - the main purpose of which is "psychological conditioning". From the entire setting (a rather seedy meeting room with a laughable "breakfast" instead of the usual plush executive style conference room) to the bankers attitude ("shithead" instead of "mortgagee") toward their client, "Things have changed." This is the message. Like boot camp, the first order of business is to break and level in order to bring the recruit back to efficient performer. The Cap'n needs to be busted down to buck (as in naked) private! It's ok to have and accumulate all the trappings of luxury as long as you're a performer - but lose that touch and you're just a wrench thrown down the engine of a high flying machine. Charlie understands his position and Zale's position. He knows who’s holding what cards. He knows he can still strike fear into the heart of a Peepgas, but not a Zale. Of course, the bank wants to AVOID bankruptcy court as a way of doing an end run and get the deeds turned over directly to them WITHOUT an auction as would be required by law. Now these bankers all obviously RELISH this role and the skull and crossbones suspenders are just a sartorial flourish of Zale's. His trademark, his Jolly Roger which he flies proudly. Really, if you're Charlie, and no one has stood up to you in this manner in years, it would come as a shock, throw you off balance, and make you begin to question your ability, just as you've been questioning your ability with your young wife, your fitness what with your knee giving you constant problems. Where do you go to get back on even ground? Why, back to your roots. Back to Turpmtine. Back where you're the Cap'n. Back where you can GRAB that rattler by the neck and show everyone that ya still GOT it!

Charlie

CHARLIE,

I think that your comments about Charlie being thrown off balance are dead on - and returning to the place where he FEELS that he is lord and master - or the Cap'n - is a necessity for his survival. He seems to feel a giant conspiracy on all fronts. He and Conrad are both facing an overwhelming upheaval of their respective value systems and half the fun of the book is the discovery of how each copes - in such different spheres. And isn't TW offering us a virtual compendium of hateful people - or people we like to think we'd hate? Who is likeable here? As a woman (and one who has been in Martha's shoes) I wanted desperately to like her but found that I couldn't. You are, as always, insightful. Did you teach at one point in your life?

I think Wolfe has each of the major characters as a satirical element of one or more aspects of modern American society and as such each has a metaphorical black eye- whether we find them likeable or not each one is a caricature.

I had hoped to like Martha and see her as a more whole person, a kind of foil to Serena- but I should have known better because as Maida points out she turns out to be unlikeable in the end.

Conrad would appear to be likeable, but he too is an object of the satire.

While Roger is "Too white" Conrad is "too good" and in the end turns out to be a way for Wolfe to get at our penchant for cults of various kinds and I imagine I might offend some by pointing out that Wolfe may also be satirizing the "born again" phenomenon with the Stoic movement; born again into this reborn ideology of the past with some of the trappings of the more modern Christain aspects of born againess.

Perphaps I am pushing this idea too far - my own tooness- by pointing out the birth images in Conrad's transformation- his escape from prison through a birth tunnel- his birth certificate forging a new life. I've obviously never experienced directly the process of giving birth, but I can imagine there is some resemblance to a personal earthquake.

I found it interesting that in the end a California -where else- judge found his case worthy based on the new evidence of devotion to the new Stoicism.

Here's a non sequitur, but SeniorNet Online has just won the WEBBY Award, which is the Oscars of the Internet, for "community," and you all are the most important part of why and how we won, so Congratulations!!

Here's the article if you haven't seen it:

WE WON THE WEBBY AWARD in the COMMUNITY category last evening!!!!!

See the attached press release about the Webbies. The list of winners is at the bottom.

Way to go!!!!!

Marcie Schwarz SeniorNet Director of Education marcie@seniornet.org or marciei@aol.com

Subject: Sweeps and Surprises Highlight 1999 Webby Awards as... Date: Fri, 19 Mar 1999 00:30:52 EST From: AOLNews@aol.com

Sweeps and Surprises Highlight 1999 Webby Awards as Winners Celebrate in San Francisco

More than 3,000 Digerati Attend Glittering 'Oscars of the Internet'

(http://www.webbyawards.com)

SAN FRANCISCO, March 19 /PRNewswire/ -- More than 3,000 online luminaries turned out to honor their own at last night's third annual Webby Awards, where 22 spiraled silver statuettes were handed out to the masterminds behind 1998's best Web sites in categories ranging from Arts to Weird.

An awards sweep and a few surprises highlighted the ceremony as winners were called onstage for the Webby Awards now-famous five-word acceptance speech.

Among the honorees: Web powerhouse Amazon.com http://www.amazon.com, which swept the awards with wins in both Commerce and Technological Achievement. Its London-based affiliate, Internet Movie Database http://www.imdb.com, nabbed Best Film Site for the third year in a row, a feat matched only by three-time Best Print & Zines Site winner Salon Magazine http://www.salonmagazine.com.

Internet Movie Database also took honors in the People's Voice Awards, chosen by more than 100,000 individual Internet users who registered to vote at The Webby Awards site. Several other sites earned dual accolades, including The Motley Fool http://www.fool.com (Best Finance Site), The Onion http://www.theonion.com (Best Humor Site), CNN Interactive http://www.cnn.com (Best News Site), and PBS Online http://www.pbs.org (Best TV Site).

Repeat winners from last year included BabyCenter http://www.babycenter.com (Best Living Site), Exploratorium http://www.exploratorium.edu (Best Science Site), and PBS Online http://www.pbs.org (Best TV Site). Superbad.com, http://www.superbad.com won Best Weird Site, a perennial favorite category of the crowd.

This year's select panel of 220 judges included musician and Internet innovator David Bowie, film director Francis Ford Coppola, "X-Files" star Gillian Anderson, Dilbert creator Scott Adams, Talk Media chairwoman Tina Brown, Inside Edition's Deborah Norville, and political doyenne Arianna Huffington. For the first time this year, PriceWaterhouseCoopers audited the Webby Awards balloting process.

"This was the year the Internet became an everyday phenomenon, and the range of winners this year reflects that," said Tiffany Shlain, Producer and Creative Director of The Webby Awards. "Looking down the list, you realize the Web is now part of the fabric of our culture, our commerce, even our relationships with each other. And we're incredibly proud to honor the people who have helped make it such a wonderful place to live."

In keeping with this year's dress theme, the top movers and shakers in cyber-culture, entertainment, media, and politics showed up at San Francisco's Herbst Theater in their "spiffiest" attire. The ceremony was presided over by Marc Maron, "Late Night with Conan O'Brien" regular and the star of several Comedy Central and HBO comedy specials, who entertained the audience with his "twisted" sense of humor.

The Webby Awards were viewed online around the globe via a live Webcast. After the gala event, winners, nominees, judges, guests, and friends rubbed elbows at the post-ceremony bash in San Francisco's breathtaking, newly-renovated City Hall. Trailblazing multimedia artists Emergency Broadcast Network (EBN), a headliner on the ABSOLUT DJ tour, took the stage and were followed by funk/hip-hop recording stars G. Love & Special Sauce.

About The Webby Awards and The International Academy of Digital Arts & Sciences

Hailed as the "Oscars of the Internet" by the San Francisco Chronicle, The Webby Awards are the leading creative honors for digital media. Nominees and winners are chosen by The International Academy of Digital Arts and Sciences, a global organization dedicated to the creative, technical, and professional progress of new media. The Webby Awards are an IDG event. The VIP pre-party is co-hosted by PricewaterhouseCoopers and Hewlett Packard. Intel is the exclusive sponsor of the post-ceremony party. The Webby Awards ceremony is sponsored by vivid studio, Levi Strauss & Co., AboveNet, Time Magazine (The Digital supplement), Entertainment Weekly, ABSOLUT VODKA, BroadVision, Access Magazine, AdForce, NaviSite, The Motley Fool, VISA, The Menlo Technology Group, Hotel Triton, The Industry Standard, LinkExchange, TipWorld, PC World, ARTBYTE, Alice 97.3 (CBS affiliate), and San Francisco Bay Guardian. For more information, visit http://www.webbyawards.com.

About IDG Conference Management Company

IDG Conference Management Company produces the broadest portfolio of executive conferences and events in the technology industry, including the Agenda(R), DEMO(R), DemoMobile(R), DemoEurope(R), Vortex (TM), Spotlight (TM), and EnterTech conferences, and the Webby Awards (R), the Internet's preeminent awards show. The IDG Conference Management Company also publishes DemoLetter(TM), and DemoLetter Weekly Edition(TM). IDG Conference Management Company is a business unit of IDG, and can be found on the web at http://www.idgconferences.com. IDG publishes more than 290 computer magazines and newspapers and 700 book titles and offers on-line users the largest network of technology-specific sites around the world through IDG.net (http://www.idg.net), which comprises more than 240 targeted Web sites in 55 countries. IDG is also a leading producer of 168 computer-related expositions worldwide, and provides IT market analysis through 49 offices in 41 countries worldwide. Company information is available at http://www.idg.com.

** List of 1999 Webby Award Winners ***

ARTS

jodi.org http://www.jodi.org

COMMERCE

Amazon.com http://www.amazon.com

COMMUNITY

SeniorNet http://www.seniornet.org

EDUCATION

Journey North http://www.learner.org/jnorth

FASHION

PaperMag http://www.papermag.com

FILM

The Internet Movie Database http://www.imdb.com

FINANCE

The Motley Fool http://www.motleyfool.com

GAMES

Gamers Central http://www.gamerscentral.net

HEALTH

InteliHealth http://www.intelihealth.com

HUMOR

The Onion http://www.theonion.com

LIVING

BabyCenter http://www.babycenter.com

MUSIC

SonicNet http://www.sonicnet.com

NEWS

CNN Interactive http://www.cnn.com

POLITICS & LAW

California Voter Foundation http://www.calvoter.org

PRINT & ZINES

Salon Magazine http://www.salonmag.com

RADIO

Freespeech Internet Television http://www.freespeech.org

SCIENCE

Exploratorium http://www.exploratorium.edu

SPORTS

Sportspages.com http://www.sportspages.com

TECHNICAL ACHIEVEMENT

Amazon.com http://www.amazon.com

TRAVEL

biztravel.com http://www.biztravel.com

TV

PBS Online http://www.pbs.org

WEIRD

Superbad.com http://www.superbad.com

** List of 1999 People's Voice Awards Winners ***

ARTS

Doors of Perception http://www.doorsofperception.com

COMMERCE

ebay http://www.ebay.com

COMMUNITY

iVillage.com http://www.ivillage.com

EDUCATION

Kathy Schrock's Guide for

Educators http://discoveryschool.com/schrockguide

FASHION

London Fashion Week http://www.londonfashionweek.co.uk

FILM

The Internet Movie Database http://www.imdb.com

FINANCE

The Motley Fool http://www.motleyfool.com

GAMES

ShockRave http://www.shockrave.com

HEALTH

Mayo Clinic Health Oasis http://www.mayohealth.org

HUMOR

The Onion http://www.theonion.com

LIVING

Epicurious http://www.epicurious.com

MUSIC

mp3.com http://www.mp3.com

NEWS

CNN Interactive http://www.cnn.com

POLITICS & LAW

The Freedom Forum Online http://www.freedomforum.org

PRINT & ZINES

Smithsonian Magazine http://www.smithsonianmag.si.edu

RADIO

Spinner http://www.spinner.com

SCIENCE

NASA Space Science Laboratory http://science.msfc.nasa.gov

SPORTS

The Sporting News http://www.sportingnews.com

TECHNICAL ACHIEVEMENT

My Yahoo! http://my.yahoo.com

TRAVEL

Travelocity http://www.travelocity.com

TV

PBS Online http://www.pbs.org

WEIRD

Absurd.org http://www.absurd.org

I think Maida asked what Tom Wolfe may think of our analyzing his prose so carefully? We may find out, we've contacted him. If he's anything at all like Bernard Lefkowitz, whose book we read, he'll be delighted to find us taking him and his book seriously.

Here's another non sequitur while I'm at it: there's a FISH called the Croaker. It's a member of the Drum family of fish which repeatedly tighten their abdominal muscles to produce vibrations which sound like drumming. They live in warm, shallow ocean water near the shores of most continents, and some spend part of their early life in fresh-water rivers or in bays where salt and fresh water are mixed. Only one variety lives entirely in fresh water.

In the South the Croaker, a large fish up to 20" long (the Black Drum can reach lengths of 10 feet) is collected by those of low income status and it was the custom to stuff them into loose weave bags such as fertilizer and seed comes in: croker sacks.

A big fish with muscles which draws attention to itself by drumming.

Oh well, couldn't resist.

hahahahhaa

Ginny

Very interesting analysis of what may be going on below the words of the book. One point that I saw in the book is the role that Martha played in the initial success as a developer in Atlanta and the fact that she came from Richmond and from a higher income status family. Have to wonder if she wasn't the brains behind the operation in the beginning. It was after Charlie dumped her for a "trophy wife" that his business affairs went downhill.

I am reminded of a book I read several years ago about Ted Turner and the starting of CNN. He rolled the dice to get a place on the satallite, which was very limited at the time, and if he hadn't won it he would have lost everything (according to the book). He was willing to take the risk and has been very successful. It seems that Charlie was also willing to risk everything to build his dream. He accomplished it but the result was disaster.

Larry

Hi everyone: Although I have mentioned this before,I still find linkage between this book & The Bonfire of the Vanities.

The architect who decorated the mansion in Buckhead, is Ronald Vine,who also made an appearance in Bonfire,I think Wolfe is having a big laugh at these high profile designers.

I have the feeling that Wolfe has established a competition between NYC and Atlanta,and both books have some of the same secondary plots. For example,contrast Mayor Wesley Dobbs Jordan,a moderate practicioner of the Atlanta Way...'The City Too Busy To Hate" with the Sharptonesque black leader in Bonfire, Reverend Reginald Baker. There are additional comparisons later on in the book.

Much of Wolfe's writing deals with "machismo" even the astronauts in "The Right Stuff"

Ed - TW seems to have a LOT of fun with what he perceives to be Atlanta's inferiority complex vis-a-vis New York, doesn't he?

Charlie

Dear friends,

I don't know if this is the correct place to post this, but here goes.

Yesterday was quite an auspicious day for SeniorNet since it won the Webby, but it also was a wonderful day for our BookClub Online, and in particular for our fearless leader, Ginny Anderson. She was quoted in the New York Times no less in an interesting article about BookClubs Online. Congratulations Ginny!!

Yes indeed, congratulations to Ginny for her recognition in NY!--See you don't have to think MM was the greatest book ever written to have a good life! I've enjoyed the book chats very,very much, but know that having a good leader is the key element! And thanks, Ginny for sharing the list of URL's--Yvonne.

Here's the place to see Ginny quoted. It's more than halfway down the page. Ginny's name is in bold print. Click Here

Ginny, congratulations! I love your posts -- so insightful and helpful to the discussion. I couldn't get in to the NYT site, but I'd love to know what you said.

By the way, in the NY Times article there was mention of the African-American Literature Book Club. I went over there and posted an invitation to anyone that might have read the Tom Wolfe to please join us. It would be great to get an African-American perspective on some of the issues that Wolfe raises.

Charlie

Thanks, All, and Fran, you are absolutely right, you can post anything here anytime, we're as much a Book CLUB as we are a literary review. I do appreciate everyone's comments, and I hope you just understand that it was the BOOKS themselves which attracted the attention of the NY TIMES? YOUR efforts??

Our real Book Clubs here, which she did remark on, as that was what the author of the piece was seeking--a REAL Book Club experience? They were just seeking a spokesman FOR the Books and glommed on me because of our Home Page, next time it'll be one of you! It's not Ginny. They left out a good bit, but we came out better than I deserve, and Charles, how marvelous, how great, I hope our sister bookclubs which were mentioned will flood in, we need their perspectives, too! Oh gosh, let's keep on and pursue that angle.

Great work!

I don't know if any of you looked closely at the WEBBY home page, but that's really something! It IS the Oscars of the Internet, did you SEE the dresses? 3,000 people present? That's a big honor and it's especially sweet when we knew, and have known, for 2 1/2 good years, that we have the best site here.

And it's fitting that two of our founders are posting here in our Book Club at the moment of our triumph: Jim Olson, who pioneered our Books sites, and Fran Olweiller, who pioneered our "spirit" here on SeniorNet, and how marvelous it is to have them both among us again!

We are not a sea of strangers here: we are a Group of Real Bibliophiles, Readers, and Friends, I hope, looking at a book together and I hope, with your help, we can continue such for many more years.

Now I have a new question, a new thought. Many have remarked upon the large numbers of men in this discussion. I know many many people are "lurking," and have not posted, as I have emails to the effect.

Several people have said to me, "well, this is really a 'man's book,' isn't it?" Would appeal to a man more?

I'd like to know, before we move to the next marvelous section, what it was that first attracted YOU to this book? Do you routinely read all the best sellers? Do you routinely read every Tom Wolfe? Did you see where John Updike, one of the judges for the National Book Awards, said he wouldn't have read it at all if he hadn't HAD to for the Awards? What's your reaction to that one?

Is there something in the subject matter that you thought would be interesting? When I look at the subject matter of the top ten on the NY Times best seller lists in fiction, this one is a bit of a rara avis, no? Unless you count Grisham.

And here's a toughie for the Ladies: Every year when they list the most attractive thing in a man to a woman (you know those lists, what do men find most attractive about women and vice versa) a sense of humor in a man always tops the list. Yet it's widely thought that POWER with a capital P is the most attractive thing to a woman (note the plethora of trophy wives attached to powerful men). Would you find Henry Kravitz attractive? How about The Donald? How about Charlie Croker??

Back later with satire, and my take on sardonic wit: remember, we have NO leader here, tho our own Charlie is a natural, I'll follow his lead.

Ginny

There was much discussion over in Salon about Wolfe's inability to fully draw a WOMAN character. So in the words of James Brown: "Please, Please, Please" - please, would surely LOVE to hear women's perspective on THAT. I don't know. It's true that it seems most women are appendages or shrews (I'm talking THE BOOK here!!). Trophy wives, either trying to keep her man on top, or cast aside trophy wives trying to latch on to another who will make her VISIBLE again. But, this IS a satire and I can't decide if that's the reason or not. What do you think?

Charlie

Charles,

I agree that Wolfe has trouble fully drawing a woman character, but as you say this is satire and none of the characters is really fully drawn. I think he also has trouble handling children and seems to avoid them in the novel.

Is there an art expert in the house? I think Wolfe uses references to art a number of times and one key incident, The Lapeth opening, is drawn from the world of art.

Did Lapeth really exist or is he a take off on someone like Marplethorpe (sp)?

I have seen the cyclorama that is mentioned in the book in a satiric way and it represents the old Atlanta, I think.

I have seen some of Wyeth's work but don't know if he really did a Jim Bowie Alamo picture like the one Charley has in his plane.

Arnold - Although I was surprised to find a real BOOK mentioned before, (Edge City), I don't think there IS a Lapeth. But it DOES have Maplethorpe written all over it doesn't it? Does anyone know if the original controversial Maplethorpe exhibit was shown outside New York first? Ed mentioned earlier that Ronald Vine, Charlie's decorator, appeared in Bonfire, but I don't believe he is REAL either.

Aside - my wife went to the Atlanta Olympics and we now have a framed poster of the Rings: Five Passions in World Art, the Olympic art exhibit at the High Museum of Art in Atlanta.

Charlie

I am posting this in two folders, because I think this is a funny coincidence. Arnold Grey posed the question whether an N. C. Wyeth painting of Jim Bowie referred to in A Man in Full was a real or made up work of art. Here is what I found. N.C. Wyeth illustrated many Children's Classics for Scribner and if he didn't paint Jim Bowie on his Deathbed, he sure could have, and it would have looked something like this: Stonewall Jackson

Further, he also did a painting called

Portrait of a Young Artist

How many of us got hooked on reading as young kids through the fantastic illustrations of the N. C. Wyeth/Pyle type? I know I did.

Charlie

I came/stumbled across this by accident. Terrific piece of writing by George Orwell. More about imperialism than hunting, but the writing sent a chill up my spine. Shooting an Elephant

Charles, thanks for those beautiful paintings.

Ginny, in answer to your question about women. Being one, I do get annoyed by Tom Wolfe's inability to draw good women characters. And he is not one of my favorite authors by far. But his books are page turners, and every now and then I love a page turner. I also love Updike and Mailer, which none of my women friends read. I love Drabble and Murdoch and AS Byatt and Kingsolver and Oates and even Binchy. I just love to read! I love reading African Americans like Morrison and Walker, and Latinos such as Hijuelos or Allende, or Asians such as Amy Tan, Ishiguro and Oe. Reading is just such a joy to me that I'll read anyone, regardless of whether I have anything in common with the characters, the setting or the mindset of the writer.

What's my point? I don't know, just that I enjoy reading Wolfe even if he can't draw a woman character and never will be able to. It's good for us to get outside ourselves and experience things that have nothing to do with us.

Sarah, me too, and I'm so glad we have you with us! I've got a lot more to say on the women characters, but I also read everything under the sun, including The Wall Street Journal and nearly dropped my teeth when I saw this in yesterday's "Weekend Journal" section for March 19, 1999~

Now, this may load slowly but please take a hard look at it, particularly YOU, Miss Helen!!. Take a hard look at the CLOTHES these folks are wearing because I have another pet theory about consistency of character to unload! (Isn't this fun??)

Life Imitates Art

Eerie, hah?

Back later,

Ginny

Beaucoup thanks for the opportunity to reread Shooting an Elephant from, I believe, George Orwell's collection, Burmese Days. He was a very special writer.

I am so happy to find you all! The Circuits section of the NY Times had an article about "On-Line Book Clubs" and Senior Net was listed!! I've struggled with "A Man In Full" but will get back to it immediately! I now have "peeps" (ha!) to talk to about this! I've read through all your messages and I am back with "A Man In Full." Thank you all for having senses of humor. I really like that! maggie

Hello, Maggie - Glad you'll be joining us us for A Man In Full. We're just ready to get into Chapters 3 and 4. Lots of stuff there! But feel free to bring up any issues that the book may have raised in your mind at any time.

Charlie

Florence Howitt,MA,MS I found "A Man In Full" verbose, full of unreal and unrealized characters, full of information I had no need of (how to mate a horse!). Mr.Wolfe might benefit from reading WhiteStrunk's "Elements of Style."His Atlanta is seen through a microscope with a cracked lens.

'

Welcome to Maggie and Florence. I would like to add your names to my Bookies email list.. Want to keep all our friends up to date.

This is the place to tell it like it is.

Florence: I'll agree with you somewhat.. The book is surely full of a lot of background. But how else can he put us in the picture to see the characters in their "good ole boy" setting?

The pictures of the hunt made me think of one of the little ironies presented in the book.

It seems to me the book is filled with irony- sometimes a double irony as when a character does x hoping for y result only to find it achieves the opposite but then that ironically works out in the end to be OK.

An example would be Roger Too White's slip during a press conference where he tries to avoid raising racial issues- then inadvertently answers a question with a reference that pushes the race button, but it all works out for him later in a positive way in terms of his status at the firm and his own personal identity with the black communinty.

The irony in the hunt scene (one of them) is Charley's posturing with his back muscles hoping to impress the ladies. We find later that Serena and Eliziabeth riding behind him are actively engaged in a conversation which probably (Linda Tripp- Monica like) includes the physical attributes of the "Cannon" the protege of "Buck McNutter" and the athlete whose records will go in the book without an asterisk.

Maggie fron the NY Times, Maggie from the NY Times, Maggie from the NY Times article, Welcome!!

Florence!~! Welcome, Welcome!!

How exciting to see you both here, whether you like Wolfe or not, this is THE place to discuss it. I note in the Amazon interview above that Megan submitted that Wolfe seems surprised that anybody would think he intended to slam on Atlanta, and I find that interesting.

As Charlie says, we're taking it in chunks, and looking carefully at the story as it unfolds, and kudos to Jim for pointing out all the elements in the story: the irony, the satire, that's so great.

We're about to embark on one of my favorite scenes in the book: the Breakfast and the Burglar Alarm, so don't hold back, will try to get some of your thoughts in the heading today, and if you're just joining us, we're deliberately moving slowly at first for your benefit, DO jump on board!

Ginny

Love the "chat" so far--glad to see Jim O. didn't leave us and hope that Florence stays as her candor and disgust is very much needed. In the beginning of the book I kept wondering if Wolfe is as hateful as his story--and was reminded of "Radical Chic and Mau-Mau-ing the Flak Catchers"(1970)--so o.k. it's a satire--my question--in a satire does a character need to be fleshed-out--or just certain characteristics "zoomed" in on to symbolize a point? And why does the book remind me of last night's news cast--there's 'new journalism' everywhere!--Yvonne

Welcome Maggie and Florence--sure glad you found us and are joining in the discussion.

Having lived in the Atlanta area for almost 15 years, I guess I don't find the descriptions of Atlanta particularly out-of-line. Since I have never been and never will be in the moneyed set I can't really relate to the characters in the book being too broadly drawn. However, the politics seem right on target with what I have read about and heard about in our news over the years.

Regarding the protection of the football star, people really like football here and it is almost a way of life. I don't think it is too far fetched to think efforts would be taken to protect such a player and GA Tech. The description of Coach McNutter isn't far from the image of George O'Leary, the GA Tech football coach. However, I have no idea where he lives and if the boosters provide his home.

Larry

Florence...Thanx for that wonderfully refreshing post.I too was just wondering what on earth did TW inject that horse copulation scene in the book for!!!

Walter,

I think there are many reasons for the horse breeding episode, but I imagine we have not yet reached that part of the book.

But since you mention it, I think one of the reasons it is there is as a kind of spoof of the modern novel..

While there is a great deal of sexual imagery and metaphor in the book- some subtle some not so subtle, there is very little explicit description of "person mating" which is almost mandated by the modern novel..

Very few novelists (and special prosecutors) can get away without an explicit sex scene.

Of course, a writer of the stature of Wolfe can do what he wishes and will have publishers lined up to publish his book. Others have to do what they have to do, and a good juicy sex scene is required these days.

He does have a number of matings with details left to our imaginations (I'm still puzzled by that cup that Serena carried in her purse as a sexual aid- don't anyone tell me- I don't want to know)

Wolfe gives us a juicy sex scene- with horses playing the roles.

You could even say he is horsing around with us.

But it does have several other functions as well which might best be left to later discussion.

One is that Charley is acting like LBJ on his farm. Part of his characterization- his earthiness- crackerness might be a another term that comes to mind

Yvonne,

You ask if any character is fleshed out rather than just having that character's follies zoomed in on as part of the satire in the novel.

I thing I will back off from an earlier statement I made and admit that in the final analysis I think Charlie as the main character is the one most fully developed.

An earlier statement by a poster whose name I don't recall pointed out the impossibility of Charley's ever really making it (or Serena's for that matter) in Atlanta society. That gave me a new view of Charley and I have been looking at him from that more sympathetic perspective.

It does provide a way of looking at the ending (verboten I guess at this time) that makes the ending work

Also, Jim it puts another angle on his retreats to Turpmtine, don't you think?

Charlie

Tomorrow I have to waste some of my time at work and some of my time over the next six weeks taking part in a "benchmarking study". UGH! UGH!! It’s kinda like the word "paradigm" (Ch 3, pg. 66). "The damned word meant nothing at all, near as he could make out, and yet it was always "shifting," whatever it was. In fact, that was the only thing the "paradigm" ever seemed to do. It only shifted."

Like benchmarks. They're a comparison to some fantasy world that doesn't exist, and which everyone (apparently) is benchmarking themselves against. I loved Wolfe's Wismer Stroock drawing. Wolfe has all the buzzwords down pat of Corporate America. I won't go THREE DAYS (I swear) without hearing the word paradigm. The thing about satire is, with just a few well placed strokes, you know the character (or someone JUST like him) inside and out. Thoroughly.

I thought is was very telling that, as Charlie lifted off from Atlanta to Turpmtine after his humiliating workout, he's looking out over the city (the city which he helped build!). He's naming off all the building to himself. And the developers. NOT the architects ("Neurotic and 'artistic' hired help"). Charlie's the builder, the doer, the man of action, the Giant, the Lion - and now he's got these PeepSquacks nipping at his heels!!

Charlie

Wolfe was asked about the significance of Serena's cup; he replied that the entire thing is simply made up - used a similar convention in Bonfire.

Charlie, I'd like to thank you for that Orwell essay, it was marvelous. Charlie also sent this URL which has a slightly different slant on hunting, and I want to get both into the heading.

Hunting in the Washington Post

I think Arnold is right, there's a lot of hinting around about sexuality in this piece, especially strong when it comes to any kind of "manly man" stuff, like hunting, for instance. I wonder why? Guns as a substitute for something else, thus embarassment when their prowess fails?

I found this quote from the Washington Post article, in particular, especially telling:

"Of course in such an environment, the man, with his rifle, the blood on his boots, his willed insensitivity, his disconnect from the pain he's caused, is a hideous anachronism. The bald act of killing is no holy sacrament but a pathological weakness. No hunter can be a hero. Meat doesn't come from animals any more, but from stores. So, the empire whose passing I mourn (where Orwell welcomed the fall of his) is the empire of masculinity, of man the protector."

I'm curious, now, as to Wolfe's whole take on Charlie Croker, Elemental Man.

Have looked up a few words to be sure I'm not off base:

satire: A literary work holding up human vices and follies to ridicule or scorn.
Trenchant wit, irony, or sarcasm used to expose and discredit vice or folly.

sardonic: Disdainfully or skeptically humorous; derisively mocking.

OK, my thought for today is, so far in this narrative, up to page 107 which is where we are looking the closest, would we say that Charlie is an object of derision? What would make him so? The fact that the Zale character publically humiliated him? Did YOU find that humiliating? Whose side were you on there?

I had forgotten how well Orwell writes, that "mask that we wear until our faces mold to it," stuff, masterful. And is that what Charlie is doing? Wearing a mask of the powerful Tycoon Man? And do we find that risible? How does irony and satire succeed? Does the reader have to feel that emotion or is seeing that somebody else (a reviewer) said it and perceiving the intent of the author enough?

A few thoughts on the continuing "manly man" theme:

Page 67: "(Strook's) neck and his chin and his cheeks and his hands were soft. To see that soft, weak face grinning at his expense--it had been infuriating. Peepgas was not strong, not fit, not manly."

And on page 70:"They would suddenly see him as...an old man...a toothless, eyeless, limping, gimping alpha lion."

And on page 75: "Wiz couldn't find the paradigm no matter how hard he looked...And that thing was manhood. It was as simple as that."

Is this part particularly satirical? Why are all these references to being manly constantly sprinkled thruout these pages, I wonder?

I'm not a man so I don't know whether Orwell's take on hunting, or the perspective in the Washington Post's Boar Hunting article or Charlie Croker's attitude is the right one, but there can be no doubt they all three exist. I wonder why Wolfe chose this particular "hobby" for Charlie, he could just as easily been a cigarette boat racer.

Maida: Wolfe kinda reminds me of Shirley Jackson,who, when there was this horrified outcry and suspicion about her "The Lottery" short story, (how could such a normal person write SUCH a story??) said, she had just made it up out of nothing. She was also the author of some delightful Erma Bombeck kinds of books, and it's not until you read her serious biographers that you can see the real Shirley underneath the mask.

I wonder if any author can hide himself when he writes?

Ginny

Also may I ask this in general? Would it be agreeable with you all to go to page 307 next week? There's not too much here this week to glom on, would like to add 100 pages to next week's stuff if OK??

Ginny

Hi Ginny: I've said it before..this book is about MANHOOD and all of the twists & turns on that subject. It's generally agreed that Wolfe is lacking in describing or interpreting the female psyche.

There is so much "manhood" in this book,that I think it passes the point of satire and falls into the realm of being ludicrous. Even the most "weak" characters, for example, Peepgass, display aspects of "manhood" (as expressed by Wolfe),such as an affair with a skinny blond Finn.

I wonder if Wolfe has ever met any "real" people,or if he is so insulated by the "glitterati" of NYC,that his vision and outlook is "too chichi."

I'm enjoying the book and love his descriptions of people and situations.

There is a vast difference between faux "manhood" and masculinity. I'm not sure that Tom Wolfe knows the difference.

I don't know whether Tom Wolfe knows the difference between "faux manhood" and real masculinity but Charlie doesn't, he needs all the caveman trappings to feel "manly". The bank scene reminded me somewhat of a bullfight scene from "The Sun Also Rises", the bull was repeatedly struck from behind by the picadors(?) and turned every which way in frustration to see where the next stab was coming from. Yes, Charlie did have my sympathy.

I'm at a disadvantage now since I lent the book to my son so can't re-read any of the upcoming chapters.

Eileen Megan

To answer Ginny's question about whether we felt sorry for Charlie in the bank scene - I agree with Eileen. Wolfe wants us to feel sorry for him; the scene is integral to what is beginning to happen to Charlie . Without this tweak to our sympathies the rest of Charlie's sage would be too one dimensional.

Okay, guys, we've read Wolfe's particular take on masculinity here - what constitutes a MAN from a male perspective? Take all the time you want.

Maida,

I guess in a sense Wolfe has given us his "take" on masculinity by presenting Charley as a kind of satiric example not a model or ideal just as Serena is not his concept of ideal "feminity"- nor is Martha who in the end turns out to be another Serena with different weapons in the war between men and women.

To be very honest with you I think every man has a little bit of Charley in him just as every woman may have a touch of Serena.

I couldn't begin to say what the ideal should be for either masuclinuty or feminity except that my answer would probably be different if I were talking to the guys or the chicks.

I go to lunch once a week with a male group of five "dirty old men" and we sit around and talk like Charleys and then sit back and laugh at ourselves for doing it. It's a kind of cartharsis I guess.

In the end I don't think "manhood" however defined is as important as "personhood".

And that would take a lot of thought to define.

Charlie as object of derision? - Not for me, or for Wolfe either, I suspect. That was my initial inclination - UNTIL he was played off against - The Bankers. There he definitely got my sympathy. I think anachronism is more apt. There is something sad about an anachronism, something so predictable. This particular anachronism just can't seem to help himself. He's hard wired (the mask molded to the face to paraphrase Orwell). We have our 'roles' to live up to. Being a "guy" is one of them. There are certain things we do which come natural in certain settings, and certain things we do that we'd NEVER do in other settings. And, as Jim says, we can laugh about these things even as we do them. (For a real good laugh, see Defending The Caveman if it comes to a stage near you). I think it's Charlie's lack of self-awareness that makes him an anachronism. A cigarette boar racer would be just another toy, or status symbol, a necessary accouterment, but just an accessory. Hunting is primal, basic.

Yikes - Maida has thrown down the gauntlet. "Take all the time you want" !!! We're on center stage guys, and suddenly I don't feel so manly anymore. Maida, is perhaps, amused by the prospect?? p.s. Ginny - Perhaps you could change the page numbers to Chapters. It seems my copy (which is a Hardbound from the Paperback Book Club - go figure - is a couple pages off - my Chapter 12 goes through page 310).

Charlie (I may be a midnite joker, but I ain't no Croker)

People, men or women, who are true to themselves (and how they came to be that person is one of life's great mysteries, and one of literatures timeless subjects), without regard to the necessity of fulfilling a role or living up to the expectations of others - Those are men. Those are women. These are beings deserving of the deepest respect and awe.

I have to admit it makes me a bit squeamish to get into a whole discussion what a real man (or woman) is because that NY Times discussion that Charles referred to weeks ago (when he talked about what a great site THIS is) degenerated into a fairly pointless discussion of the same thing, with insults hurled back and forth. Ugh, it was awful.

I agree with the previous posts that I actually felt sorry for Charlie when he was humiliated by Zale.

I agree Charles about paradigm and benchmarking and corporate speak in general -- I used to work in that world and I thought the book captured it well with Wiz.

For some of the reasons mentioned in previous posts I would not venture into attempting to define the real man or woman.

I do feel Charley is an overdrawn character for satiric purposes as one reader pointed out with an apt metaphor (seen not through a glass darkly but through a microscope with a cracked lens) but that doesn't mean we cant sympathize or even empathize with him- after all he is the hero.

I admire some of his "manly" qualities overdrawn as they are.

He is a man of the earth- the basic hunter at our male core. He uses the smallest most difficult shot gun (410) to bag the "bobs" as it is the least destructive of the flesh that the basic hunter brings home to feed his mate. I had such a gun in my youth- given to me by an aunt who was a great hunter.

He makes a contest of it, however, just as hunting has been corrupted with the many hunting contests that have taken over the hunting and fishing world.

he meets and tames the rattlesnake on its own terms foolhardy as that is (lots of examples of "acts of foolishness" in the novel)

I admire the desk in his plane made from the natural wood collected at Turpemtime where he goes to get back to his roots (overdone of course- who needs that much space- I'd settle for a few acres of a nearby nature center or public hun

Charles, that's beautiful! You really write so well.

Sarah, I'm always so excited to hear what the other sites, Salon, NYTimes, the Washington Post, are doing because I don't have time to go to them, and it's always a little frisson of joy to hear that we here, doing our own thing, are, you might say, "holding our own," while not nelecting any themes. We've always thought we were the best, I hate to say, and we may be correct in that, as so far we're not slinging insults...In this case, Wolfe himself not only brought up the subject, but has hammered the reader relentlessly with it these first 100 pages, to what end I have no clue, as am reading along with the designated pages....

I like Ed's and Arnold's take on what's happening here, too.

I suspect that the issue of "manhood" is something, like Jim says, that might creep out from time to time, even though a man may not be comfortable expressing it. There's quite a ritual accompanying hunting, as our two essayists in the heading and Arnold have indicated, lots of stuff to know (shotgun size) that the average woman wouldn't know (and probably, in this day and time, the average man would be less than knowledgable about, too).

Perhaps the author of the Boar Hunt article is correct in finding us at the turn of the century presiding over the death of the Elemental Male, but I have a feeling that men in general think more about what it means to BE a man ("you'll be a man, my Son!") than women do, or care more, for that matter.

You don't see too many women worrying about being "womanly, " unless somebody else thinks she should stay home and keep house and cook. Seems to be a given, really. However, a fairly new phenomenon is the Woman Hunter, and there I really must say I find that unnatural, lion prides notwithstanding, I think there's something TOTALLY UNNATURAL about a woman going out on a hunting trip. Does the image bother you at all?

And then you've got the trophy wife thing, introduced quite early in the book. Is not the trophy wife symbolic, too? He may be an old man, (of 60!!!!) but he's still got whatever it takes? I have a sinking feeling about our Charlie here as I personally have no good opinion of such matches.

In the last section of our pages this week we have the scene in the Mayor's office, where two black men also have used two different methods of speech with each other, this parallelling Charlie's change back into the patois of his S. Georgia roots, and several things brought up that I did not know. I didn't realize that Jesse Jackson coined the phrase, "African American," and I didn't know what "get out the vote" money was, are those two facts true?

I did think Wolfe's image of the baseball reflecting Atlanta society, the mile of white string around the core, and the core being a hard black rubber ball, was fascinating. I'd like to hear from somebody who knows whether or not Wolfe made that up or that's a saying there.

Three million versus 280,000 is quite a difference in numbers, and it interests me what was selected as the core, and why, possibly that was done.

By the way, several here have used the word "Cracker." What is your definition of "Cracker?" Charlie Croker, the Big Boffster, is a long way from what I thought a "cracker" was supposed to be?

Ginny

Ginny, I believe the term African American was coined by Jesse Jackson. The baseball description as representative of Atlanta seems on target to me. The City of Altanta is predominately African American while the suburbs have more whites and other ethnic groups.

Larry

Hi: I do not know what being manly requires,but I do know when to do the right thing.

The role of the male is quite different in other cultures and societies,and I'm certain that the role is different in different parts of the USA.

I think Wolfe is attempting to show the American male as both serious and silly,and I don't think that any of Wolfe's previous works show any conflict between the silly and the serious. In "The Right Stuff",the astronauts hotdogging exploits both amuse and awe him.

Well, well, well! Your various takes on my innocent comment relative to what contitutes a real man were SO interesting. I wasn't intending to throw down a gauntlet but admit I was curious about possible answers. Jim, you had it just about right, I think. It really isn't so complicated. Charles, would that everyone posting here about Charlie could see Defending the Caveman! However, some of the men sitting near me in the theater that night were definitely NOT amused while their wives were falling onto the floor.

Some of you know that I work with teenagers everyday - I think that I will pose my masculinity question to the boys - I find that they are far more upfront about this sort of thing than the girls of comparable age. The boys model behaviors on fathers (when there is one) or on mom's current boyfried. The girls honestly think that they are emulating this year's teen models - and NEVER mom.

Enough. I sympathized with Charlie throughout much of the book - because he kept trying so hard - he gets lots of credit for that alone.

Ginny - Remember Ed Rollins, a Republican 'strategist', still making the rounds as a talking head? HE got into some hot water over "get out the vote money" a.k.a. "walking around money."

Cracker? especially Georgia Cracker? - From Encyclopedia of Word and Phrase Origins: Corncracker was someone who cracks corn to make grits or cornmeal. After the civil war, being too poor to buy their own, many people had to make it themselves and so the phrase cam e to mean a poor white backwoodsman. Under the Florida Hate Crimes Act, the term is a racial epithet that is a violation of law.

Have you noticed that, almost the first thing mentioned in the introduction of a new black character is the skin pigmentation. I am led to believe that this…obsession? (can I call it an obsession of Wolfe's or of a certain segment of black society?) is not all that far fetched.

ED-Very interesting comment about Wolfe's work not showing "any conflict between the silly and the serious." Is this the purpose of satire? Some of my favorite writing is laugh out loud funny and deeply serious at its heart at the same time.

I had a very hard time feeling any sympathy for Charlie when he was humiliated by Zale. After spending 10 years as the lowly assistant in the macho world of tv sales for an entertainment company and meeting and working with sooooo many Charlie's I felt it was due time. The macho guys I worked with were so similar to Charlie, instead of hunting it was golfing and going to the cigar bars afterwards ... women were NOT invited. 90% of these men were all on their second marriages to women 15-20 years younger and these women were clearly just adornments. The remaining 10% had very young girlfriends. I guess me not seeing the 'ol what goes around comes around in my workplace made me happy to see Charlie get it in this story.

Barb - I know what you mean. As I said earlier, my first reaction to Charlie was to dislike him, but I just couldn’t help feeling a little sorry for him at the hands of Zale. If it had been ANYBODY but him, someone he had evicted from a property he wanted, someone he had downsized out of a job…but NO - it had to be Zale. And I resented Wolfe for this - MAKING me feel something for Charlie left me feeling manipulated in a way. And this comes later - but I found myself also resenting Wolfe in a way because it was difficult to feel any sympathy for the "trophy women" - they were drawn in such a way as to not deserve it either!! Who to 'identify' with. Why do I have to identify with anyone??? Is that REALLY necessary?

Charles; Good point.I too,found the personal appeal of these characters changing from page to page...I like him...I hate him...I like him ...I hate him...'til I finally realized that I really don't care for ANY of them! With the possible exception of Conrad,I haven't found a character yet that I'd enjoy spending some time with...but I'm sure that'll change before I finish the book.

What was interesting about the women -- trophy or otherwise -- was that even they had manly qualities. Serena was one of the "boys with breasts." Martha had shoulders like a linebacker. What's the significance of this.

Maida, Charles, Barb and Walter -- I agree that we weren't SUPPOSED to like Charlie, but were manipulated into feeling sorry for him at times. I found it really annoying, but couldn't help myself.

Ginny, you're right -- this place is different, which is why I have stayed here, even though I confess not to be a "Senior." (I took your statement that "Everyone is Welcome" seriously and must say I really love this group and this site.)

None of the characters in the book were "real" to me with the possible exception of Conrad, probably because he reminded me of people I know who are walking "disaster areas".

Eileen Megan

Repeatedly we read that Charlie's "pride and joy" came from the serious "toys" he had used his money to buy. At this point in the book (over 300pgs.) I can think of no person in his life (of equal position) from whom he received that kind of pleasure. It's all about making deals, being recognized as the big time money man, macho man…those are his values.

Also enjoyed ,"Defending The Cave Man" here in New York. Isn't the hunter in today's society more likely to be the guy who goes out to provide for his family and not literally the hunter of animals. You've got to be taught. Several educators I knew had been raised upstate and when the hunting season opened, it was like a magnet…upstate they went…every year…wouldn't miss it. Yet the men I know would never think of killing an animal. Charlie would sneer at them and refer to them as "environmentalists" or worse.

Miss Ginny how did I ever doubt you? However, I still think those men in your advertisement are small change compared to Charlie, and those ads were for hunting plantations, not the main tres upscale residence that Charlie owned. On his plantation the guest quarters alone went for over 2.4 million and the table for 3 mil. But you sure were right about what they wear to go a hunting on their plantations.

Hey and what about the position "he who would live forever" with the titanium frames with eyes like "a pair of bar-code scanners took at the rattlesnake round-up? Only his youth and agility would have gotten him out of there faster than I.

As I was writing I realized that this guy CC reminds of of an LBJ!

Helen, I have the same experience when it comes to hunting -- I'm a city slicker and have lived here all my live, as have most of my friends. But for work I spent long periods of time in both Crescent City (near the California/Oregon border) and in Merced, and when it was huntin' time, everyone disappeared. You practically had to take a court holiday on the opening day of the season. I cannot envision finding the killing of critters for sport fun, but I guess I'm one of those "environmentalists."

 

Here is the story of my boar hunt that illustrates a concept of 
one aspect of "maleness" that I held 54 years ago. My concepts 
have changed over the years as I no longer hunt nor would I engage in  
any acts of war but I still recall this incident with a kind of male  
memory glow. 

Following WWII I was in the occupation forces in Korea where my 
duties as a non-commissioned officer (corporal) involved managing 
a quarters for field grade officers in Seoul, Korea. 

To assist me in my duties and also to assist the officers, I was 
assigned an interpreter, a Korean who spoke fluent Korean, 
Japanese, and English. His help was invaluable and we became good 
friends.  He had connections in the country and invited me one 
weekend on a boar hunt in a mountain village where his family 
owned some rice fields. 

I borrowed an old Springfield bolt action rifle from an officer 
who had used it in the China-Burma theatre and  loaded  a jeep 
with some extra gasoline and we were off, fording rivers and 
streams, straining and grinding in low with all four drive wheels 
spinning in the sandy river beaches until some local fishermen 
put aside their cast nets and pushed us on.  Finally we headed up 
the mountain roads, bouncing and rattling. 

The rice fields were terraced into the foothills, and going 
beyond them to the base of a mountain we met a group of Korean 
drivers who were to drive the boars down the mountain to my 
position in the valley.  The village had not had a pig feast for 
some time and the men took off from their usual chores to help in 
hopes that my rifle might help them get one. 

By late afternoon it became apparent that we were not going to 
succeed and they left to do more pressing work in the field. One 
driver stayed with me, however, and with one dog to assist us we 
roamed around the mountain looking for game. We were about to 
give up when just down the ridge from us  we heard a cacophany of 
barking and squealing. The dog had "captured" a  sow by the hind 
foot, but she had also managed to get one of his hind feet in her 
mouth.  They twirled around in a circle. The rifle was useless in 
such close combat. 

Finally both of us  each grabbed a rock and took positions on 
opposite sides of the dervish. Each time the pig came around we 
would smash down the rock, usually hitting the pig but not 
always.  Finally the pig or maybe it was the dog slowed enough so 
I could get a solid blow to the pigs's head and the guide 
finished the job by cutting the pig's throat. 

He then went through the traditional practice of cutting off the 
ears, pegging them to a tree, and saying a prayer for the pig's 
spirit, thanking her for providing food for the village. The dog 
was off to one side sulking and comtemplating man's inhumanity to 
dog, glancing up now and then, licking his wounds without any 
spiritual comfort. We tied the pig between two poles and each 
carrying an end over our shoulders  proceeded  over the mountain 
to the village followed by the limping, scowling dog. 

We arrived at nightfall and later that night villagers celebrated 
around a fire in the village clearing  with the men forming a 
circle around the pig.  The women gathered in a group on one 
side. In the ensuing ceremony a village elder cut open the pig's 
belly and dipped a shallow white, china bowl into the cavity, 
filling it with blood. The bowl was then passed from man to man, 
each taking a sip. 

The women watched with interest, becoming rather animated, some 
gently jumped up and down, and some giggled, all apparently very 
appreciative of this part of the ceromony. I pointed to the women 
and asked my interpreter was what going on, and he replied with a 
universal male gesture involving striking the inner elbow with 
one hand causing the forearm to rise suddenly into the air, the 
blood it seems was  a powerful viagara precursor. The rest of the 
ceremony involved cutting, roasting and eating the battered pig 
flesh. 

I slept well that night. 

The next morning as I was preparing to leave I noticed that the 
villagers appeared serene and peaceful and were even friendlier 
than usual.  Even the dog managed a feeble tail wag, probably 
having been well fed for his part in the affair. 

Five years later I returned to Korea and noted from the back of 
the four by six that carried me through Seoul that the hotel I 
had managed was rubble. Later as I crouched down on the side of 
Hill 902, my binoculars revealed a scene that reminded me of the 
village except that there were only smashed houses where self 
propelled artillery had passed through the night before, leaving 
wide tread marks on the remains of the thatched roofs. 

The distant hills were covered with craters, and there were no 
villagers in sight.  There were occasional popping sounds created 
by miniature sonic booms as sniper rounds passed overhead, some 
clipping branches overhead from the small bush I was using as 
cover. The high pitched whine of the incoming artillery rounds I 
had called for changed to a lower pitch indicating they were 
going overhead toward the source of the fire. 

An enemy soldier on the hill across from me got up out of his foxhole  
and advanced down the hill just as six rounds of my called for 105 mm 
howitzer rounds exploded all around him. I've always remembered the  
bravery of his act and how at the time I felt a male bonding  with  
him. 

I did not sleep well that night.

NORTH SHORE LONG ISLAND NEW YORK

Have been re-reading the book...and here are some thoughts on CC

He is a self-made man...an entrepeneur of sorts in the real estate market. His permanent memorials to achievement are bricks and morter in and surrounding the city and overextended himself with Crocker Concourse...which is the first domino...also he is facing being 60...humiliation of being faced with the possible erosion of all he had spent his life building...reputation..."toys" if you will...property with a history (Turpmtine) Helen your observance of a comparison with LBJ is well taken...the size of properties and things in Texas are comparable on many levels and also the testosterone level. "Giant" springs to mind.

"Physical prowess has been vital to Charlie's rise from the pulp mill his father worked in...college football star...good ole boy,etc.

The rattlesnake scene was perfect timing for the much needed ego stroke to reestablish him in his own and others eyes. "gimp or no gimp he was still Cap'm Charlie Croker"...a moment of shear triumph, much needed and in his own milieu.

Sarah - Hmmmmm. "What was interesting about the women -- trophy or otherwise -- was that even they had manly qualities." I'm wondering if this says more about Tom Wolfe than it does about what we're supposed to take as this (A Man In Full's) segment of society's view of women? Certainly I don't think we're supposed to take it that women are only valued insofar as they show 'manly' attributes.

(Arnold - You mentioned much earlier that PlannersBanc could just as well be called PlottersBanc. Well life if very nearly imitating art again. In a local mega Bank merger (BankBoston and Fleet Bank), consumer groups have suggested that an appropriate name might be FleeceBanc.)

And someone (Ed? Jim?) mentioned, I believe, Candide in a reference, I think to Conrad. And now Eileen is talking about Conrad as a walking "disaster area".

Helen makes me wonder - where DOES Charlie get his kicks - from ACQUISITION or COMPETITION? Is it the things he is able to accumulate, or the 'game', the 'sport' itself? And Helen is reminded of LBJ? Yes!! Remember the famous picture of LBJ holding up some hunting hound by its ears?? That's Charlie!

Thanks for the story, Jim. Very nicely done.

Regarding the "boys with breasts" description of Serena and other young women ... has anyone been to their local gym? Whenever I go to the gym I see this all over, I find it both accurate and amusing. Once again it showed me how TW has his finger on the pulse of American society.

A bit of trivia - on Dharma and Greg tonight (first time I've ever seen it -- really!) the mother of one of the characters was having a meeting of her book group and what were they reading? Why, A Man in Full, of course! They didn't actually show the group, so I wasn't able to gain any new insights.

No, you're right, Charles, that TW doesn't ask us to value women for their manly attributes. Quite the opposite -- all that matters with them is their physical appearance. I just thought it weird that where you'd expect references to their femininity, there were references to masculine physical qualities. I just didn't know what to make of it. And you're absolutely right, Barb, that TW captured a body type that truly is seen as the ideal these days. Never mind the fact that most of those breasts are -- shall we say -- surgically enhanced (although that fad seems to be dying out a bit).

Can anyone remind me where we actually are in the book at this time -- that is, what do this week's chapters cover (I confess to having finished the book several weeks ago and I've read several since). I may, like you B. Tubbs, have to read it again (although I have the same problem as Larry -- it's in great demand at the library and takes weeks to get my hands on a copy even if I put it on reserve). The story is fading away very quickly.

Charles, out here they showed a Frontline program on PBS from a couple of years ago that examined the gulf between middle class African Americans and inner city blacks. Henry Louis Gates at Harvard narrated it. It was fascinating. It made the point that there is as much difference between these two groups as there is between the white middle class and inner city blacks. Class, not color, defines how African Americans (and everyone else) think.

I'm reading another book right now by Margaret Drabble called The Ice Age. It is set in England during the recessionary 70s and captures a lot of the feeling I get from A Man in Full. A lot of the characters were property speculators and are now nearly bankrupt because of astronomical interest rates and the real estate slump. The main character is more sympathetic than Charlie - more of a follower than a leader in the speculation game (the leader is in prison in this book) - but it's very reminiscent. (Just in case you're looking to read themes!)

Sarah - Sorry I missed the Frontline program - I don't think it was on here. There was a huge flap concerning a magazine article (more to the point a magazine headline for the article) about Henry Louis Gates earlier this year. Actually it was a fairly flattering portrait of Gates. Unfortunately the title for the piece was Head Negro in Charge which has all kinds of historical connotations and which is really an African-American coined phrase for a community leader but has its germination from slavery and the "house negro" - (I believe I'm remembering this correctly). Caused quite a stir - a fizzled boycott, a "regret" not an appology. It's interesting that there are phrases used by a certain segment of society amongst themselves that are 'forbidde' for use by outsiders because of the connotations that others bring. Only ONE example is the use of the "N" word which is quite rampant in rap music and on the street, but, of course is an extreme racial epithet when used by an outsider. Words sure are powerful and dangerous!

By the way, we're actually been only introduced to two of the major characters (Charlie and Roger Too White) and they've been placed in their milieu and we see where they're headed, what troubles lie ahead. (Chs. 1-4). The next section is where we meet Conrad on the job, get up close and personal with Peepgas, the famous alarm scene with Charlie which has been mentioned by a number of posters already as

Charlie, did you get cut off too? Floyd noticed this in his posts in edit, hope this is not an indicator of a coming crash.

Sarah: Oh yes, absolutely, age means nothing here, the only thing which matters is the mind! You'd be surprised at some of our ages. I hate I missed that Dharma show, but I do think this book is on everyone's list.

Now the schedule is up to page 107 for this week, as Charlie has indicated, and then thru Chapter VIII in the book (note heading). And for the benefit of those who have returned their books to the library, will post additional info about the events and characters by Saturday, I hope!

Jim, that was fascinating, a parallel between boar (again!) hunting and the most dangerous game, thanks so much, what a life you've had! I wonder if people who DO hunt make a parallel between that kind of hunting and the ability to defend ones own home?

And here's our Helen at last! Just saw her and her brilliant husband Jerry in NYC, and guess WHAT we talked about over lunch? You guessed it!! MIF. And Helen and I disagreed over something coming up next week in the famous Burglar Alarm scene, and what a joy it was just to DISCUSS such issues, I'm counting the days till I can launch in, but keep the photo of Brays Island firmly in cheek when I start. (Note that Helen, even now, demurrs sweetly while appearing to agree!)

And Barb mentions the gym, and on the cover of, was it Time or Newsweek that had the issue about Modern Woman and had a model who, as some readers pointed out, looks like no human being they had ever seen on the cover. It's amazing what now we're all supposed to look like. Even track runners have muscle definition in their arms that a body builder in Charles Atlas' day would have killed for. It's a new master race, yet we can see Wolfe's opinion of that, too, in his description of Strook's throat, stringy like most milers? I didn't know that? I don't run miles, but I sure do walk and that took me to the mirror in a hurry.

And Megan with our Conrad in the freezer lockers, a walking disaster. Why is it some unfortunate people seem to BE walking disasters? Do you know anybody like that in real life? Don't psychiatrists say that the truly ACCIDENT prone are that way for a reason? That there are no accidents, really? I know that's a bit off the subject of Conrad.

The Gates book is all over the news, I wish we could get some of our sister book clubs in here to help us out on this.

I'm glad to see Larry tell us about the Atlanta society, think that's interesting, and am glad to learn about the Jesse Jackson thing, too.

I think, if I can say so without totally embarrassing him, that Larry is an excellent example of what being a "man" is....he says what he thinks is right, regardless of the situation or the politics of the situation, after he's thought it over carefully from all sides. You have to respect that, because you know he's not stated it lightly. He's probably turning purple from embarrassment from reading this at this point, still.

It's a pleasure to know you fine people, I'm very grateful for your presence, it's an honor to be associated with each and every one of you.

I went back, in "research" for my thoughts on the upcoming week's stuff and I find two things on the first couple of pages that I do think are worthy of renote:

1. Charlie's employees CALL him "Cap'm Charlie," but he does not REQUIRE that they do. That's from them. That's important. Appearances are very important to our Charlie, note his pleasure after he subdues the rattler in their murmured "Unnnh."

2. When the book opens and Charlie is flexing his back muscles, they are clad in khaki, and so is Inman Armholster. On page 7 we note that "at a Georgia plantation shoot khaki swas as obligatory as tweed at a grouse shoot in Scotland--" Everybody's in khaki. The parallel between England and its sports and even the Royal Family's hunting pursuits is also not lost on such plantations, and isn't it thought that the "yes, Ma'am," is pure English import from the 1700s? Eddie Marie, you know this stuff!!

Compare the Bray's Island photo for the dress?

If any of you happen to KNOW somebody like Charlie, you know the truth of this statement: "When he was here at Turpmtine, he liked to shed Atlanta, even in his voice. He liked to feel earthy, Down Home, elemental; which is to say, he was no longer merely a real estate developer, he was...a man."

There is a reverse snobbism that takes place among such people as I have known and it's readily apparent, and "Turpmtine" is a fine example of it. Wolfe has glommed on to it perfectly, to be, what I'm sure they referred to him as, "a city boy." I would love to ask him how he was received on his fact finding trips, what he WORE, how they treated him. Would love to hear the truth. At any rate, the stubborn spelling of turpmtine is not a mistake it's an IN YOUR FACE I'LL SPELL IT ANY DARN WAY I PLEASE, I OWN THE 29,000 ACRES OF IT, WHAT HAVE YOU GOT?? attitude that does definitely exist. Ostentation, Wolfe says in the Amazon interview, conspicuous ostentation, and something else: pride. Pride, depending on where you live, is either a mortal sin or a major virtue. Wonder which it is for Charlie?

Please note also that Plantation Charlie is riding a Tennessee Walking Horse so he doesn't have to post. He's not riding "English," here. He's not a show monkey duded up for the show ring, he's an Elemental Man.

Charlie: I can't see this Charlie picking up a beagle by its ears, do you all REALLY see Charlie as LBJ? Have any of you read the latest book on LBJ? I have not read it and want to know more about how they are parallel? Charlie seem to me to be a different kind of man. I may be totally off base there.

Ginny

Haven't read any LBJ bios - just remember that famous photo and it DID seem so 'Charlie' to me. As I recall, picking up a beagle like that is not supposed to hurt them at all - at least that's what LBJ said (??). The ability to turn on your down home accent at will strikes me as very LBJ like also. So, Ginny - what we want to know is: have you ever BEEN on a quail hunt? You're not going to believe this, but I once worked for about 6-months in a Food Service Warehouse. Can't wait to tell MY tales of the Suicidal Freezer Unit!

Charlie

Charles; As a former Food Service Warehouse worker,I hope your fate was better than Conrad's!

Charlie, what kind of question is that? hahahahahah What's your definition of "been?" hahahahahaha

Food freezer lockers? Oh boy, I can't wait, want to hear all, thought Wolfe was a little sketchy there, didn't quite understand all that, kept thinking of slaughterhouses and Upton Sinclair!

Ginny

A&E the other night did a biography of John Steinbeck, and I couldn't help but compare Steinbeck and Wolfe- history will decide if they are in the same class.

Literary critics have denounced Steineck as being overly sentimental- not a criticsm that would apply to this Wolfe although maybe to the earlier Thomas Wolfe). They obviously belong to two different generations of American writers.

But there is an element of social criticism in both writers and the portrayal of the freezer scenes and the prison scenes in "Man" could well have been subjects for Steinbeck as well.

To Charley's credit he has twinges of conscience (or perphaps just a vague squeaumishness) when he thinks about his food comapany and suggests it be sold as it is his least favorite enterprize. But economics prevails and it is just downsized although Charley continues to draw a huge salary from the firm while he lays off workers.

That is Steinbeck type of subject matter. Personally, I don't think Wolfe handles it as well as Steinbeck might have done.

Arnold: I wish I had seen the Steinbeck, I had written it down and then something came up as usual, but on A&E they repeat a lot so I hope I can get it, love Steinbeck.

I think that's a very interesting comparison, between Wolfe and Steinbeck, I, too, especially in this new section for tomorrow, thru Chapter VIII, do see social commentary and psychological commentary as well. In fact, I think this next section is very well written, myself.

I've just put up, in preparation for tomorrow's beginning of our new section, a url to three mansions of Atlanta currently on sale in the Wall Street Journal. As ornate as they are, there are some more impressive, tomorrow's NY Times ought to provide one or two.

I can't wait to hear what you think of this new section, have put up a few of what I thought were the highlights in the table and will try to get some quotes from the book up, too.

Maybe I'm reading TOO closely, but Wolfe appears to be saying quite a lot here about the human condition, but WHY o WHY does he persist with these stupid names?

I think somebody's mentioned this company name before: "Wringer, Fleason and Tick," but I want to know WHY? What is Wolfe saying here to us? Is this a slap in the reader's face? Does this say, "Well I'm not taking it seriously, and so why should you?" OR???? OR?????

What's your take on this, sort of obvious, no?

Maybe I missed something here!!

Ginny

I am probably jumping the gun on this aspect of the book but then it is an element that goes throughout and that is Charley's bad knee.

I wonder why Wolfe put it in. It shows one area of vulnerabilty of Charley, and it is a link to his football days so he can tell that game story over and over. It also figures in the plot a little at the end, but why the knee?

Did Wolfe have such an operation? His portrayal of it is very accurate based on my expereince except for the removal of the "stitches"- actually metal staples since stiches aren't used anymore. I don't think there is normally much if any pain involved with the staple removing process- maybe that was all in Charley's head. In my case a nurse did it with a dandy little staple remover. Many seniornetters have had this operation and there is a discussion group about it in the "Health Matters" folder.

In my case I had the same type of anaesthesia and the same curtain which allowed sound but not sight in. Interesting.

I suppose it is also a way of getting Charley and Conrad together but there could have been many ways to do that. Does anyone know if Wolfe had first hand experience i

The part of the book that I think I will always remember is the problems that Conrad experienced when he went for the job interview. I thought the writing was superb and marveled at how Wolfe could keep up the anguish of the events that unfolded that day. It seemed to me it was also a commentary on poverty as Conrad didn't have at hand the money he needed to get out of the problems. The scene with having his car towed was probably realistic and the problems of getting the money to pay for the car and the attitudes of the people he encountered along the way. I did feel that it was reaching in his trying to get his car without having the money to pay for it, but suppose that was necessary to get Conrad in jail.

Larry

It's interesting, isn't it, as Jim and Larry have just commented, I hadn't noticed how many times Wolfe causes his characters anguish, pain or outright humiliation. I thought this section for today, thru Chapter VIII (some incidents profiled above) was also fine writing. Wolfe seems to carry a world of meaning in just a few words, but, reading it again, after seeing Jim's and Larry's posts, causes me to stop and wonder WHY there is so much angst for each of the characters? I don't know, particularly, WHAT Wolfe is saying here.

I'd like to get up a list of questions for Tom Wolfe, if we can interest him in answering them, and certainly the knee and the humiliations will be tops on the list.

How I have waited for today, this section of the book is very memorable to me, also, so many events took place in these pages, where to start?? Where to start?

I think I'll start with Breakfast and the Burglar Alarm.

How masterfully Wolfe does this. Here's Charlie, can't sleep, up at 4 (does that ring a bell with anybody?) Since he's awake, why not make a fine day of it, "Down Home" breakfast, a dawn ride, the whole nine yards, throw a vigorous slant on an aging complaint: up at 4. I've been getting up at 3 and 4 for some time now, I know exactly what he feels.

Immediately we're plunged into the Trophy Wife. He felt a stab of nostalgia for Life With Martha, his first wife. "Martha he could have reached over to and shaken ...and whe would have....asked him why he couldn't sleep...Your first wife married you for better or worse. Your second wife married you for better." So he feels alienated, tries to read a bit, decided that "He was a player, a plunger, a risk taker who loved the great game more than the rewards (REMEMBER THAT!!) He was a good old Baker County Georgia boy who started off down in the dirt and so the idea of rolling over in the dirt once more didn't scare him. He'd dust himself off and make it yet again.......Chronological age didn't really mean anything, but...he was sixty now..."

Then he gets up but his knee reminds him he's NOT invincible, even then! "Action was called for."

Then the alarm goes off. Brannng...he tries to blame it on Serena, who is not having any, and in front of his son, Wally, whom he has spent a total of 30 mintues with in two days (because he's NOT Charlie Croker and that thought occurs to Charlie the first time every time he looks at him!!!!) she stuns him by speaking to him as if he were a child. "What time does it say?"

"He couldn't just let her have it...not in front of Wally. (WHY NOT?)....He couldn't just laugh it off---he'd look weak, since she was clearly trying to put him in his place. No--he'd--he'd tell her about the country breakfast--the country breakfast---and---how he was going to relax and enjoy it, how it would take more than an hour....aw hell, that would really sound like a confused old man....and besides, every true leader of men knew that when challenged by an underling, you don't stop to explain."

Here Charlie is unable to share his deepest thoughts with the one person he should have been able to communicate with: his wife. I think this is a powerful statement, coming like it does into a crisis, and shows Charlie's increasing aloneness. Whom does Charlie HAVE to talk to? Is this, I hate to ask, something more than one person faces? Here again one wonders whether Wolfe has had a similar experience. Charlie is afraid to let down his guard, I guess because Saerena married him as ONE thing, he's not willing to let her see the other. or.....your take on this??

I think this is very powerful writing, about a man who, regardless of what he says he is, is more taken up with the appearance of strength than actual strength. I was about to revise my opinion of the striking anomaly here, which Helen and I argued over lunch about, his clothes, but I think I will hold fast. His hacking jacket, his britches, his black polished boots. Uh huh. Not for a Baker County boy raised from the dirt, no.

What do you all think? Did you notice the clothes on the men in Bray's Island? I saw Helen's comment that Charlie is beyond their estate, yet, Inman Armholster is in khaki and so is Charlie when we meet him.

I subit a little nit picking reality check into the marvelously written scene: (What is going on with Wally? Is this how fathers view sons? What about Charlie here, what is Wolfe saying about the advancing years of man despite his efforts to keep time at bay, what of the stark contrasts of the Tycoon Humiliated, and can any of us relate to his experience?) and that is, that the real Charlie Croker would not have dressed in English hacking clothes for a dawn ride.

What's your view of any or all of this?

Ginny

 

I found the social message contained in the tour of Fareek's old 
neighborhood in contrast to the mansions in the upper class 
neighborhoods to be somewhat diffused by the occasion of the 
tour- the mayor's attempt to manipulate Roger into his plot to 
get Charley involved in the defense of Fareek. 

I was never quite clear I was seeing this neighborhood as it is, 
as Wolfe sees it, or as the mayor sees it. The writer's point of 
view seemed to shift and it was clear that Wolfe was giving us 
the mayor's motivation- his concentration on those aspects of the 
scene that would impact on the coming election. 

Perhaps that incident served several purposes in the book and I 
felt that whatever reservations I had about it, it was very well 
done. 

I had not thought about the black teen male fashion as being 
prison dervied and felt that aspect may have been overdrawn. It 
is certainly logical and may have been accurate at the moment. 
The one thing I do know about teen fashion; black, white or 
whatever,  is that it changes and I don't think prison garb does. 

I liked the phrases Wolfe used in describing the exit from one 
house when the driver did the "cop magic." 

The one phrase, "the thinnest veneer of Cool"  describing the 
"smokeheads" departure from the building reminded me of a 
personal experience in San Diego several years ago (when black 
teen fasion was a little different). 

We were riding a bus in the downtown area when a hefty young 
black teen got on. At that time the fashion was to have a belt 
but to wear your pants as low on your hips as possible without 
having them fall off. His were very low and when he went to sit 
on one of the side seats in the front of the bus with all eyes on 
him, his pants slipped down to reveal  his colorful shorts. 

Everyone  refrained from laughing. He maintained "the 
thinnest veneer of Cool", pulled the cord for the next stop and 
hobbled off the bus, pulled up his pants and waited at the 
stop for the next bus. One old black man who had been sitting 
across from him smiled looked at us and shook his head. 

Come to think of it I have seen fat crackers with the same fashion.

The teenage garb described in this novel comes straight from the street gangs of LA, NYC and Chicago not, I think, from prison. Prisons is this country clothe inmates in one piece jump suits - with, of course, no pockets. Usually these jump suits are color coordinated to make each prisoner's status apparent - immediately. The loose-fitting pants and tops - even the exaggerated footwear - worn by the teens is useful in the drug trade - worn by those who actually deal and also by wannabees.

Has anyone wondered about Charlie's almost total lack of interest in his own two children? Wally and Serena's baby are merely shadows in the plotline.

Arnold; I don't think TW was exaggerating when he talked about teenagers emulating prison fashion trends. The floppy,open,laceless sneakers were refered to as "Felony boots" and they also had a name for the beltless,baggy pants that the kids seem to love,but the name escapes me at the moment.

However,Maida is correct in that all prisoners dress alike AFTER they're sentenced and shipped off to prison to serve hard time.But in the local lockup,shoelaces,ties,belts etc. are taken and they're left looking like a bunch of high school kids!

Hi: Arnold & Maida: I have often wondered if the "prison/drug " garb is a fashion statement or a cry for help.

ED, I'm not sure that prison is the deterrant is was when we were younger. Many teenage boys see a prison term as a mark of toughness and God knows they certainly are taught all the refinements of crime once they find themselves behind bars. Prison, reform school - no big deal for many of the kids I counsel. Two years ago two young boys (13 and 15) purposely set out to murder their parents and did so brutally - the 15 year old was quoted as thinking that "three hots and a cot" wasn't so bad and besides he was looking forward to being able to shoot hoops anytime he wanted.

Was watching a thing on Hemingway late this afternoon and wondered how much Charlie wanted to emulate him - the big man (physically), the love of the hunt. I don't know, I think I'm reaching too far on this one.

Charlie feels himself 'breaking down', like an old horse. Serena's manner of speaking to him, Zale's manner of speaking to him, his son's manner of speaking to him - these things would not have happened 'in his prime'. He is becoming increasingly hobbled - his knee being the prime physical manifestation. Socially hobbled by his failing business empire, respect is not coming as easy these days. For the second time he sees Serena talking to someone more like her own age (first Elizabeth, now his son Wally) and he's embarrassed. He admits to himself the reason he married Serena in the first place: Sex and vanity. The sex is a thing of the past (?) and his vanity is under attack from all sides.

Charles - well put.

Maida, I agree about Charlie's children. I was thinking about this earlier when Ginny, I think it was, brought up Charlie's interaction with Wally. I thought that whole father son relationship was utterly neglected except for one point in the novel.

Yes, and it's not just Charlie who can't get respect, all of the characters so far have problems. Look at Peepgas, living in that nasty place under the highway. He, too, had a wife, and threw that all away for Sirya, and we can see that Charlie was right about him, a "little" man taking revenge on one he sees more powerful.

I am fascinated by the characters and their "skeletons" in the closet, they all seem to have some as far as we've gone, they all are vulnerable. I guess that's a part of life, real life, and Wolfe is truly excoriating in the case of poor Charlie here.

Who among us has nothing hidden he'd not want shown up here, for instance? Not too many, I think.

Now on the "tour" of Atlanta, I found the part with the stairs leading up into nothing that Roger didn't recognize at first sort of hard to believe.

Years and years after I had left the old Philadelphia neighborhood from which we had moved when I was 5, I took my children back (why DO we do that?) on a pilgrimage and found not only the row house we had lived in, but the very streets I had walked down. A lot had changed, and it's true it not changed quite as much as Roger's old neighborhood but no matter how much iron was in front of Wes's old house, it should have been recognizible to both, I think?

I don't think women look at their daughters and say to themselves, "well, she's not ME," or do they? I don't have daughters, I don't know? I have sons. Is this common with parents and children of the same sex?? I don't know.

I guess the "tour" was the raison d'etre for Wes' deciding to support Farnon BEFORE he knows whether or not he's guilty: he stayed clean in that awful neighborhood and worked himself up, yet, surely a tour was not necessary.

Did you find it funny that nobody knew what a quail looked like?

Wonderful comments, Everyone!

Ginny

Also I loved Arnold's story of the pants on the bus, and am so glad we have Maida here who counsels youth for her input and of course our Walter who was , as he mentioned in Our Guys a Probation Officer, I believe so we're pretty well set here in the world of Youthful Offenders!!

And Helen is a psycological conselor, too, so we have a world of expertise here in our discussion we'd not have had.

I thought the description of the gang was well done too. Once with my children in tow, the oldest about 14 or so, very tall for his age, we took the wrong subway and got off in Queens. When we exited, it was an ampty street but at the end of it was a gang of very nasty looking kids: not black, but nasty looking gang type kids. One of us shepherded her kids right back into the subway in a heartbeat, with the gang in loud approach. Safely on the subway, my oldest son complained, what was the rush? I said, That was a GANG, Hon! He said, "Mama, they're only KIDS!!"

Well, they were plenty big enough for me and there were a whole lot MORE of them, too.

Ginny

If you make a post today, how about keep a copy of it, the software is doing strange things, I fear a crash?

Ginny

Arnold,

I think you have something with that "thinnest veneer of Cool" phrase.

I think it sums up several characters.

We have Charley, a Cracker with the thinnest veneer of Patrician.

Serena, a whore with the thinnest veneer of lady.

Roger, a white man with the thinnest veneer of black.

Atlanta, a parochial city with the thinnest veneer of worldliness.

Wolfe, I don't know what but the veneer is that white suit he always wears.

Martha, a lady with (I can't figure out the veneer here- but it's there -at least at the end)

Conrad, an innocent acquiring a veneer of experienc

JIM OLSON

That bit about the characters' veneer is well put. GINNY, I have two grown daughters both of whom are accomlished young women. I am inordinately proud of them. I suppose I would have to admit some pride if I catch piece of me in one of them but I simply can't imagine being relieved that they are NOT me. Carrie and Sarah wisely took what I had to give and flew with it; both have created independent lives - successful lives both financially and emotionally - I wouldn't have it any other way. We three are close, I hope, because I've never tried to impose myself on them. Having had sons can't be all that much different, can it?

TW writes REALLY well about things of which he has personal knowledge or has researched. He doesn't write all that well about WOMEN and CHILDREN. I don't know that this is unusual. This is particularly manifest when TW "reports" on something with which one is very familiar. As I said before, once between jobs, I decided to take a temporary job on the "night shift" at a Food Service Warehouse. Pretty good money, physical labor, keep in shape, allow one to devote full time to job search during the day. TW's razor sharp wit is topped only by his surgeon like eye for detail. It's as if he worked in that Suicidal Freezer Unit for, oh - say 6-months. Right from the beginning where he contrasts life winding down into a "lovely little operetta" to the refrain of "brain dead, brain dead, brain dead" he nails it. Everywhere else life is winding down - but at the food warehouse (9 PM to whenever - until you finish - no until EVERYONE is finished - it's time to get pumped up for a brutal brain dead evening. The perfect song for the environment. Heavy On the Bass) I know exactly what it feels like to pull into the parking lot on a summer evening at dusk, a little early, time to get your head together. About to enter "the engine room, the heavy plumbing" area. The infrastructure. There's a long distance between a diner's plate at a fine restaurant to Aisle C, Bin 16DD and a box of canned chopped tomatoes. And you see people coming in to work like TW describes. Radio blasting, tires squealing, like jabbing your fist into the air in one last exultant jab of freedom. One more shout before zombie time. And those air brakes EEEEEECCHHHHH….EEEEECCCCHHHHH. Everyone means a truck to fill, a route to be dispatched. Picker. Now I worked in the "dry" section. The freezer crews were the elite, the hard-timers, the stubble chinned senior dues paying teamster storm troopers. Dressed in their brown puffed up jump suits, they were zombies on the prowl. And ah - "light night". Those magical words. You see even though there was seniority and elites, there was also lumpen-democracy. No one went home until EVERYONE was finished. And when the workload was finished EVERYONE went home. Full shift pay! Loved those "light nights." We all had our horses (order-pickers) which were lined up at the corral (the battery charging station) waiting for us and I can still hear that first high WHIIIIMMMMM-WHIIMMMMM as everyone engaged the gears in their order pickers for the first foray of the evening….picking up the top order in the pile and at a glance knowing what you were in for…learning the art of building a pallet (Flour sacks and corn meal criss-crossed together, the large institutional tomatoes purees on the bottom, the smaller spices on top….losing your load taking a corner too fast…cinnamon everywhere…the call for clean-up….crawling hunch-backed into a rack to get the last case of string beans. This is where I saw my first capers- all over the floor. TW has it all down. The utter EXHAUSTION of the job. Without a doubt the hardest work I ever did in my life. But what I want to know is:

What's the difference between satire and cynicism?? And:

Arnold and Jim - thanks for the veneer take. Very helpful in understanding.

And Ginny: Well - I didn't know what a quail looked like until I ate one last year. I have a funny feeling I STILL don't know what a quail looks like!!)

Charlie

Ginny: "I found the part with the stairs leading up into nothing that Roger didn't recognize at first sort of hard to believe."----Hard to believe on a 'realistic' level perhaps, but - is TW trying to show how "Too White" has been so cut off from his roots that on a certain level he really doesn't "recognize" this place? Interesting how TW has Mayor Jordan "decorate" his office with "borrowed" roots (Yoruban Art)…How Charlie keeps acres and acres of his roots as a sanctuary….

Charlie

Charlie, you ought to write, that was marvelous!! I wish Tom Wolfe could see that! I'm not sure I have the "night lights" fully in mind. Do the others jump in and help when only one is left working so all can go home? I could read a lot more of that!!

How cold WAS it where you were?

I agree Wolfe is famous for doing his "homework."

Maida: I wouldn't think it would be different, but it seems this problem between fathers and sons is pretty prevalent, I would be glad if a daughter was not like me, myself!!

Jim Olson, WHAT a provocative post, as per usual.

Oh, I'm not sure about Patrician and Charlie, I don't see the veneer at all. He's just a Baker County Boy and THAT'S WHY the Zale thing would NOT have produced saddlebags, because he knew he came from dirt and he could return to dirt with no problem and start over. Wolfe has him cold! Now if you said he had a veneer of macho man, I might try to agree, as Charlie cares more about appearing "manly" than he does a fruity Patrician. He has no use for Armholster?

Love this discussion.

Ginny

Oh, yes. EVERYONE pulls together to finish up. It's like everyone finishing a marathon at the same time. Then leaving work at dawn - it's the OPPOSITE of coming in. Everyone ELSE is GOING to work. Really get the feeling that the tide is going the other way. That somehow you're headed in the wrong direction. And you probably are - as Conrad suspects. Unlike the truly pathetic Peepgas - headed in no direction at all - living alone in Seven Eleven Land. He's like a piece of driftwood, washed ashore, his mid-life crisis come and gone. It's clear he deserves everything he gets - and I come closest here to feeling sorry for him - but don't quite make it.

I've got lots of new stuff for your interest, I hope. I asked my South Georgia source about the word, "Cracker," bracing self for the response. Strange to tell!!

Do you all know the origin of the word? I apologize if it's been mentioned here while I was in NYC, I did read all the posts but very fast.

The word Cracker comes from mule drivers in the Georgia swamps who pulled logs by mule out of the swamps, logging in the swamps. They cracked the whips and so were called crackers in both Georgia (mainly) and Florida. In my Webster's, Cracker with a capital means resident of Georgia or Florida, cracker with a small c is disparaging about a poor white Southern person.

There used to be a semi pro or farm baseball team called the Georgia Crackers.

Similar to this name is the Tar Heel, here I lost entirely the thread when my source explained about the pine rosin in North Carolina and Georgia, being used for Turpentine!! (and pronounced by my source as "Turp M tine." It seems that the NC industry in turpentine exceeded Georgia's and so from walking around in the goo from the pine trees' manufacture of rosin, the North Carolina Tar Heels were born, and of course you can see that in the basketball teams' names.

I said that those crackers must have been pretty rough and rugged guys (Georgia/ swamps/ summer/ gnats/ skeeters/ heat/ hell) and he said, o they were stout! (Had to look up stout, means a lot more in the South than fat).

Stout: "strong of character, brave, bold, firm, determined, obstinate, uncompromising, physically or materially strong, sturdy, staunch, enduring, substantial, forceful...."

Red neck of course refers to a farmer who plows in the sun whose neck is not covered with ball cap and whose neck shows him to be a man of the soil rather than a white skinned businessman.

So here's my question to you all, I'd really like to know.

Since when is a farmer the object of derision? The term "redneck" is now pejorative. Wherein is Charlie a cracker? What has he said or done which makes him the object of our emnity? What's not to like so far in the story?

Are we falling into the trap of disliking him because he has money? We see his underbelly right from the first! Where is Zale's underbelly? We're just now seeing Mr. Prissy Peepgas for what he is?

Where are Charlie's Archie Bunker sentinments? Why don't we have a derogatory term for the Archie Bunkers of the world, by the way? Do derogatory terms have to apply only to Southerners??

Ginny

Ginny,

Not all derogatory terms like "cracker" and "Bubba" and "redneck" are reserved for the south.

Many people for whom these terms are used take pride in the designation.

Groups of football fans from various teams often have derogatory designations like "cheesehead" that they relish and even go out of their way to imitate.

In the midwest a rural northerner who has been in the woods logging too long is called a "Jack Pine Savage"

I'm sure there are many such terms that cover a wide geographic span.

Jim,

I agree with youe "veneer" classifications , but that also presents one of the problems I have with the book and that it that while Wolfe shows us the veneer, he doesn't take us down into the "heartwood" of his characters.

Maida,

Father-son relationships I think are essentially different than mother- daughter or mother-son relationships, each has its own characteristics and whatever else there is, there is always an element of conflict as the father sees the son as a rival in some respects.

Let me give an example of the difference- generally (and there are always exceptions) when a person ages to the point of needing care it is the daughter who takes the older person into her extended family- seldom the son. I think this is particularly true if the older person is male; he is much more comfortaable having a daughter in charge of his life than having a son dominate his last days.

I think the matriarchal instinct (the Ma Joads amongst us) is much stronger or at least different than the patriarchal one

ARNOLD, I like the Ma Joad reference and agree with you about the matriarchal instincts. Why, though, would a man see his son as competition? Does that imply that men are, by nature, competitive on all fronts. Guess I'd better stay away from generalities. I'm fascinated by those of you with southern roots needing to explain some of the terminology. We northerners aren't usually called rednecks or crackers. There is, though, a sort of friendly name calling among residents of Maine, Vermont and New Hampshire. Massachusetts folks are called Flatlanders or Taxachusetts natives. Hick, Emmet and Yahoo are big around here. A Peepgass is a Wuss. According to columnist Bill Barnacle most Maine women have only one decent tooth and most New Hampshire ladies pride themselves on an upper lip moustache. Only a few Vermonters are natives - the rest are misplaced liberal New Yorkers. Before you protest, Charles, remember that Barnacle is one of yours!

Redneck is an interesting pejorative. I note Ginny's derivation. Somehow, a negative aspect was attached to a farmer, a man of the soil - but by whom? If by 'educated people', isn't that ironic? Perhaps by upper class Southerners, embarrassed by the lack of education of the 'farmers'. Education is sometimes confused with "smarts." Now, growing up in Florida, and going to UofF in the panhandle, I've used the term redneck - but not quite in this way. To me a redneck is a person who is intolerant of things he does not understand, of things that he or she perceives as a threat. I have seen hate and fear redden the neck of many a bigot. That's how I used the term. I don't use it anymore.

"What has he [Charlie] said or done which makes him the object of our enmity?" Well - (1) The dumping of his wife for a new model - I have a problem with that. (2) The Hebe Richman Freudian slip - he's insensitive and, I think, a patrician bigot. Harmless in that respect, but part of the ingrained attitudes that make change, real change, seem so futile. But as he becomes the underdog, as I've said, these things fade into the background for me. Zale's underbelly?: he is the most one-dimensional of TW's cast. He's a hatchet man. Period.

Archie Bunker reminds me of a funny story. A few years ago, on a Memorial Day weekend to D.C. to meet up with some friends from Atlanta, one of the people who came along was just this type of person. In fact, a good friend of mine from Atlanta is just this type of person also. Nicest guy in the world. Would do anything for you. He worked in Boston with me for awhile. We worked in a supervisory capacity and had a number of Black employees 'reporting' to us. They genuinely liked the guy. But he is at heart, a racist. Harmless for the most part - but part of that hardened foundation of racism that may never go away. But I digress. The funny story: His friend, who he brought along, came with us to The Smithsonian. His fondest wish was to see Archie Bunkers Chair. And we did. Never forget that. The chair of, essentially, his hero.

Maida - A Peepgass is a wuss? You're kidding. I've never heard that term before (peepgass, that is). Mike Barnicle is the columnist, Bill Barnacle is a lobster restaurant in Peggy's Cove (Maine) (Barnacle Billy's - I make a summer kick-off trek up there every year to "walk the rocks" and have a summer drink in the outside patio). HA! Heard Barnacle on the radio this morning - said the most time he spends in New Hampshire is at the Portsmouth Toll Booth, on his way to Maine - especially when he uses a 2 Dollar bill!!! Ouch!

Charlie

When I lived in Florida in 1948 a neighbor described a cracker as a person who was "lazy, shiftless and always had a mis'ry". So Charlie definitely wouldn't fit into that description.

We all could come up with local derisive names for country folk such as "country bumpkins", "local yokels" "hayseeds" etc. Satire makes fun of someone or something, cynicism never sees the good in anyone or anything.

Eileen Megan

The term "redneck" in our part of rural IL, refers to any person who is a little backward, a member of the American Rifle Assoc., but also one who is very prejudiced against any person who doesn't have white skin (this includes Mexicans, Orientals, Southern Europeans, and Black and Native Americans) and doesn't go to a Protestant church. They are also the ones who ride around in red pickups with a couple of rifles hanging in the back window. And their granddaddies and their daddies and their sons are all the same. And the worst of it is that there are 2 of them on our local school board.

This appeared in today's Boston Globe: Color and Class - More reaction to the Lawrence Otis Graham book. This book continues to get ink.

Can't help but feel that Charlie got his just desserts when he got rid of Martha because she failed to look as good in her forties as when he had first married her. He wanted what so many of his other wealthy cronies were getting …a trade in on a used wife. Well it appears that he got himself a lemon. When he asks himself what Serena is doing in his life he openly admits to the answer as being strictly for purposes of sex and vanity. There's old macho man Charlie again as he says in his confusion,"But that was the way the male animal was constituted, wasn't it…" Also sounded as if Martha had been some of the brains behind early investment successes. We can pretty well generalize that scenario to many parts of America today. You hear about so many of these men starting new families with their child brides and having babies to deal with in their fifties and sixties...good luck to them!

Compared to Conrad, who so far is the ONLY character, I have met to this point that is worthy of some consideration for his positive moral stance and aspirations. Here is a man with a terrible personal history which he was determined to overcome by working and saving so that he could provide a decent life for his wife and children…so very unlike what he had known growing up. I don't know where TW is taking this character but so far it's not been any place good…. I anxiously wait to see how this character's life unfolds.

Thanks to our Charles for his personal account of working in a freezer unit. Makes us realize how very much TW delves into the research for his settings. Hard not to feel queasy at the description of what happens when the worker in the freezer part of the unite takes off his gloves and unwittingly takes hold of metal. Ugh!!!!

Hey on a personal note Jerry and I ran into Walter and Lorraine at a local restaurant tonight. This is a first for us…actually meeting people we've met through the net right in our own local area. It was so nice to see them again.

Conrad seemed a very realistic portrayal of a lot of the working class young guys that live out here in the Bay Area. It's a very hard place to survive if you have little money (and grows more and more so by the day). Houses are so expensive that many resort to living in the sort of place Conrad lives in. More and more like him are being driven out every day. In fact, people now commute from the San Joaquin Valley (e.g., Stockton, Modesto) to get to work in Silicon Valley or San Francisco.

Very interesting article, Charles, about the Graham book. I don't know how I've missed all of this publicity - not to sound provincial but it seems the issues of the African American elite are more an East/South issue than a West one.

Ginny, remind me of the dinner scene at which Charlie and ?? thoroughly insulted Herb Richman. Was it anti-semitism or anti-gay rhetoric - I can't remember but it really turned me against him.

Did any of you ever have dreams as a kid of coming home and having your house gone? That's what the stairs leading to nowhere reminded me of -- almost as if he'd never actually led that earlier life.

Trophy wives are big out here and it annoys any woman over 30 to no end. I remember when I was as young as 18 or 19 and definitely into my 20s that old men hit on me all the time. Even then it bugged me; I remember writing a whole diatribe in my journal about how women my mother's age were being deprived of companionship because so many men wanted a 20 year old.

Although I thought that Charlie was a fool for dumpimg Martha (She sounded like a Georgia Peach!) I have the impression that Serena might have been the aggressor in that relationship.

The thought occurs to me that Serena may have taken on the place in Charlie's life just as Charlie wanted it. He apparently didn't include her in the part of his life that dealt with his business and his problems. It seems he put her on a pedestal and wanted her to stay there. While she may have pursued Charlie, he certainly was a willing participant and then obviously regretted what he had done.

Larry

Charlie:

I loved the story about the elephant, but could not access the one about the boar. AOL reports it could not be found.

Charlotte

How great to see so many great thoughts in here this morning!!

Charlie, Charlotte's right, do you have a copy of that Boar Hunt? We can put it up in an html page, if so.

The comparison of Charlie with Hemmingway by Maida really stopped me in my tracks: that's a good one. I must confess to never having had any sympathy at all for the big "hunter" Hemingway who I always considered a fake. Talk about your veneers!!! I may be wrong, tho, just as I was about the Cracker thing.

Arnold is 100% right, I found to my shock, having braced myself for a diatribe when I asked my source about "Crackers." There's sort of a reverse snobbism thing that goes like: if you make fun of me, I'll laugh too, and turn it around on you. Example: "The Bubba Fest" held locally in which Bubbas in "overhauls" turn out and be Bubbaish.

Charlie asks what the difference is between satire and cynicism and Megan had a good answer, I thought. Put more definitions up in the heading. It's amazing to me that John Updike commented on this book that he wouldn't have read it at ALL if he hadn't had to for the National Book Awards since Updike was a judge. If you want to see cynicism in action read Rabbit Run or any of that series. Those books fill me with such dispair and cynicism I just can't read them. They make the whole world look black, to me. I don't get that feeling so far in this book.

I don't think Roger would be SO cut off from his roots and his neighborhood which he claims as his heart that he wouldn't know where he was? Or he and I are a lot different. I can understand his not knowing Wes's house, but not his own. He would have memorized every step of those steps unless they had been replaced, which IS possible. Wood and all.

Arnold and Maida mentioned the father-son relationships and Helen said she thought Conrad had the most positive character so far, but what did you all think about the scene where he's to punish his son? That was SO strange, to me. Not right. The child has punched his little sister in the stomach, everyone is screaming, Conrad is to be the Punishing Father, and what happens?? The child tells Conrad to "shut up." "What did you say? Softly, tearfully, deeply muffled:' You heard me." It was a decidedly halfhearted form of defiance--but what would they think?"

"Shut up? Conrad felt helpless. To what level of anger was he supposed to ascend now?"

This, to me, is strange. There's a build up and then Conrad, with an alcoholic father himself, feels totally detached, even to the point of not knowing how he should feel. How did this scene strike those of you who have childen?

Maida, I need definitions because I'm not FROM the South, I'm from Philadelphia, originally, and must have grown up under a rock, but am not familiar with what the terms actually MEAN. Have no problem understanding how they are used.

It's strange, isn't it? Have you ever considered how angry you have to be to even in your own mind consider labelling somebody as anything?

(How marvelous, by the way, that our Helen and Jerry MET our Walter and Lorraine while out to dinner in the tiny town of New York City!! Just goes to show you that our Books have made the entire world one big home, even IN New York City!! What a trip!)

Sarah: Unfortunately, I'm reading right along with the Chapters so have not come to the dumping of Martha nor the dinner with the anti Semitic remarks. One reason I don't like Donald Trump is his very same dumping of a much better looking wife for the awful brainless Marla Maples, and he got what he deserved, too.

Pat W: is the NRA a bad word in your area? I don't think Charleton Heston is helping anything.

And Walter, I don't think we can blame Serena totally, do you? Takes two to tango and Charlie obviously was ready for the dance or he'd still be married to Martha. Why on earth men think that having a young woman on their arm makes THEM look young is ridiculous. Look at that Anna Maria whatever and that poor 90 year old man, I mean you can carry things to impossible extremes.

On the Trophy Wives situation, didn't you find pathetic the part where Arda Ella Otey on page 174, "woke up one day to the fact that she was now an obscure woman in her forties, in a strange place, on her own, hunched over a word processor in the circulation department of The Harvester ...At that point she began to work into any and all converstaions the information that she was, in fact, the former wife of the eminent Philadelphia Main Line gastroenterologist Dr. Arnold Otey."

Ouch ouch ouch!! OUCH!!

This is SO bad. Oh what is Wolfe saying here about name droppers... about women who are dumped... about value in life.... about?? AGGGGGGGGG

Ginny

I thought Larry made a great point about the "pedestal" thing, too. To me it's a kind of strange dance couples play in which they take a role that suits the other or the marriage but which may be totally unsatisfying to both. Then, as Orwell said, and I may be paraphrasing badly, we wear the mask until our faces stretch to fit it. Maybe Charlie protects Serena from business because:

1. He thinks she couldn't possibly understand, she's stupid. 2. He doesn't want to bring work home (note his irritation with Armholster talking business on a hunt). 3. He never made an emotional connection with her anyway.

Either way, it was his call and now he wakes up and wonders WHO that is in the bed next to him?

Can't feel one bit sorry for the guy, myself, on that score (says the old still married first wife)!

Ginny

By the way, I think the anti Semitic remark occurs at the end of the Breeding Barn Chapter, doesn't it? Or does it occur again? Just read that one, anyway.

Going to have a good time at the tire store today reading thru Chapter XVI for next week.

Ginny

Sorry if I revealed something from later chapters -- oops.

. I saw Updike on Charlie Rose last night and Rose said "so what is it with you and Tom Wolfe." While never revealing what was in his New Yorker review of Man in Full, he alluded to it. Now I'm dying to read it. Is someone willing to make it a clickable here?

Sarah, I would if I could find it, do you have the URL for it, would love to read it!

Ginny

Charlotte - The Boar Hunt essay appears not to be accessible anymore. It appeared in The Washington Post and they archive for 14 days only, so I think it's gone. I have tried to find the Updike New Yorker article, but I don't believe the New Yorker is on-line at all (it appeared in the Nov 9 1998 issue). Here is an article on some of Wolfe's reaction to Updike and other, like Mailer. Mailer's is pretty funny. Typical Mailer. And how about Charlie Croker as Norman Mailer rather than Hemingway??? Mr. Wolfe Bites Back

CHARLES, I stand corrected.

I've got it in the heading now, and also a picture of a quail from SouthWest Georgia! Thanks, Charlie!

Ginny

I thought this was pretty interesting. Ginny - did you write this?? Here's a review that appeared in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution AJC.COM

And this is a fascinating article that also appeared in Atlanta on culture and the arts in Atlanta, especially in light of Wolfe's book - Arts in Atlanta

Larry - What an interesting point you make! Yes. Serena was the "model" for this time of Charlie's life, as Martha was the "model" for his early, clawing up the ladder years. Each is the perfect accouterment to Charlie, and fills a role. We'll see later how Serena is ready to fight to keep Charlie atop the heap (for her own purposes, of course). In the meantime however, Serena is not at all "supportive" in Charlie's eyes and is a moneydrain

Sarah - I wonder if issues of the "elite" period, not just African American elite, are more an East/South issue than a West one?? Your comment got me to thinking. There is the Eastern Establishment, The Boston (Hub of The Universe) thing, The New York Centric idea, the southern heritage of family and breeding and class. It seems that on t'other side of the Mississippi, the Frontier, all that is dropped away. I'm talking in generalities here, but there is perhaps some truth to it…By the way, Ginny is correct - the 'Hebe' Richman Freudian slip does come at the end of Chapter 12 (The Breeding Barn)

Don't you think it's telling that as the Mayor is trying to make a point with Roger, all Roger can do is make references to the architectural styles. NO, I think he really is blinded by what he has become so that it IS difficult for him to see with his old eyes. Until Jordan makes his "grayboy art" comment, gets him angry and opens his eyes somewhat..

Charles, no, I didn't write it, but I wish I did, and will write HIM pronto! Likewise, the second article was most interesting, I thought. Thanks so much, they're in the heading. Aruba?

Ginny

"Can Charlie Croker Save Farnon?"

That is an interesting question and the answer depends somewhat on what one means by "save."

Save him from what- ignorance, arrogance, exploitation of his athletic skills?

As I see it none of the people concerned with saving him from a dubious rape charge has any real interest in saving him even from that and that is probably just as well, as there is not much likelihood given all the circumstances that he is in any real, immediate danger. We do get a hint from the mayor that sooner or later Inman or others will get Farnon- the mayor hopes it won't be anywhere near Atlanta when it happens. But it won't happen right away for all kinds of reasons which don't really depend on Charley's role which is really only incidental to the final outcome.

From the public sports myth of the hero rising from ghetto he has already been saved (a dubious distinction). I think Wolfe is exposing this myth along with others but since it is mainly a plot device he doesn't really explore it.

I sometimes wonder about some of the young blacks I taught in Junior High school who went on the be sports heros (until their knees went out and they were discarded ) and were essentially cheated out of reaching their potential as fully developed human beings, a potential some of us saw and tried to nurture.

A few went on to achieve the later by sheer force of will and continued education (following the example of the ex-Viking football hero now serving on Minnesota Supreme court)- most didn't. They ended up as Farnon's peers in the gehtto did aided in this course by the added handicapp of fallen stardom.

What might Cassius Clay (Ali) have been with his mind and spirit as sharp as they were? What undeveloped potential was there that ended up with a scrambled brain, living out his last years in a fog.

We see the "rape" incident from several points of view and are never really told what actually happened, but it is clear that it wasn't rape in the general sense of rape. Rape is not about sex, but power and brutality- the irrestible impulse to punish (remember Native Son). Neither Elizabeth or Farnon seems to see what happened between them as having either of these elements. Both of them view it as no big deal- Having sex is probably one of the things Farnon had in mind as part of the party- Elizabeth clearly aniticpaied some sexual contact but probaly not what happened. But at any rate it was not something to traumatize her.

Atlanta is in no mood to shatter any sports myths or lose its football glory. It doesn't take much under the circumstances to "save" Farnon.

We have an interesting situation now in neighboring Minnesota where what everyone knows was happening in terms of the academic life of the basketball team has come to light- ie- most of the players had their academic work done by counsellors hired and controlled by the coach. The governor (the flamboyant Jessie) has reacted by condemning the newspaper that broke the story (shoot the messenger) and the university is actively pursuing ways to discredit the whistle blower rather than correct the underling problem. The motives of the whistle blower are in fact quite suspect, but the basic facts well know by all. They were there in 1945-49 during my student years and things have not changed.

Just as the the community is using Fareek for its own purposes, his "friends" do the same. The mayor sees his situation as an opportunity to thwart a challenge to his election, Roger has a chance to advance in his law firm- the coach- well his interest is obvious, the black activists see it as a chance to advance their cause (remember Bonfire of the Vanities?) Given the friends Fareek has he doesn't need enemies.

In the final analysis and the fullest meaning of "save" nothing is going to "save" Fareek Maybe it is another irony of the book- the qualities that took Fareek out of the ghetto will in the end be the ones that destroy him

Hi: I saw a short interview with Jesse The Gov. in which he said that college athletes should NOT HAVE TO TAKE ANY ACADEMIC COURSES AT ALL,because most of them got athletic scholarships & they can take the courses when their playing days are over.

It's bad enough that academic standards for athletes are so low. I guess except for a few schools,the day of the scholar/athlete are long gone.

I want to back up a minute to where Ginny commented on Conrad and the scene where he's to punish his son. Where are there father-child relationships in this book? There's Charlie and his children (three by Martha, and one by Serena), but essentially only Wally. The relationship is one of complete estrangement by Charlie (can this be MY son?), punctuated by Charlie's embarrassment that his sons and wife's ages are closer than his own to his wife's. Serena obviously relates with Wally better than Charlie does. Wally probably has Serena fantasies and seems resentful of his father. There's Inman Armholster and Elizabeth. This relationship as pictured in the book is strictly based on the protection of reputations - Inman's as much as Elizabeth's. There's Raymond Peepgas and his children (two with his wife and one with Sirja Tiramaki). The relationship with the children by his wife is non-existent in the book and he expresses nothing but fear and loathing that there even exists a Pietari Peepgas!! Lastly, there are Conrad's kids (Christie and Carl), and yes, he does come across as the inept father, which is resented by his wife. Not much good to say here about a father's relationship with his children. Also, of course, TW takes the opportunity to nail hippies (the parents of Conrad)…. I put this down to the fact that TW writes well about what he knows and falters or presents a skewed portrait of things he doesn't understand (or has not taken the time to understand).

What in the heck is "onomatopoeia" -- as in "Wolfe loves onomatopoeia," a quote from one of Charles' clickables above.

Jim - we've been hearing a lot about the scandal in Minnesota out here and it's such a shame. The players are truly in a bind, too, because most of them are only in college because of their athletic skills and don't have much academic skill, but at the same time they are expected to perform academically up to a certain level. Without a whole lot more support than I suppose they get, what are they to do? I don't at all condone what they did, but they are in a bit of a Catch-22, don't you think?

Charles - yes, I think you're right about there being much less concern with the "elite" (of course, not being one of them, it may just be that I'm blind to it!). Sure we have our society page and beautiful people, but it doesn't permeate our lives the way it seems to in TW's Atlanta.

Charles, I actually thought TW's portrayal of Conrad's parents was not so far afield of reality. I think there are a lot of 20-somethings around who are the product of Summer of Love parents, and who are pretty aimless and cynical. Maybe they're not as stuck in a deadend as Conrad, but many of them are having problems. What about Conrad's parents did you find unrealistic?

Sarah - Onomatopoeia - The use of words whose very sound suggests the meaning - as in Peepgasssssssss ("le petite flea"), Charlie Crok-UH (Cracker), Wilson LaPeth (said while holding your tongue) the homoerotic artist, Charlie's 'stud manager' (Charlie Groin-er….oh, brother!) Arthur Lomprey, PlannersBanc XO (as in eel), etc. etc.

I know, I know. You and TW ARE right. I just always stick up for hippies. Knee jerk

Jim's talk about The Cannon reminds me - at this point after having been "presented" with Fanon in all his disdainful glory, and having heard little of Elizabeth Armholster, only from Inman…..before any talk of date rape, before Serena's explication. What did you think?? I ASSUMED Fanon was guilty. I admit it. Then I felt guilty about that. Then I felt that I was supposed to assume that Fanon was guilty. Once again, I think that TW's purpose was to manipulate what he showed us in order to let us assume Fanon's guilt…Make any sense??

Walter,

I thought from the early discussions of the mayor and Roger and Roger with the coach etc. that the accusation was more important in the novel than guilt or innocence. To make the plot work the accusation had to be made. What actually happened was of little real importance to the various plot and character threads in the novel.

Although I don't admire the manipulative mayor, I somehow suspect his frankness in dismissing the issue of guilt or innocence is one of the many things he says in the novel that are quite candid and cynical, and I would nominate him for the one character that Wolfe uses to reveal himself- the candid and cynical observer part of him anyway.

Give the mayor a sense of humor (which he lacks) and you have Wolfe.

I didn't see the "rape" as anything more than a plot device by Wolfe to tie a lot of things together which it certainly does as well as adding its own elements of satire. The scenes where in spite of all the "coaching" by various coaches Fareek reveals himself as just a big dumb stud, (nothing but a cannon on and off the field) are some of the funniest in the novel. His comments on Charley as a 60 minute man, are satiric and ironic because we already know that Charley is not that in the sense that Fareek means.

Charley is more like the stallion in the horse breeding episode- all wrung out by sex.

I may be a little ahead of the chapters here, but since you mentioned Serena's revelation of conversations with Elizabeth, I think those need to be looked at carefully as a mixture of what Elizabeth actually did tell her and the spin Serena places on it to assist in getting Charley to defend Fareek.

We know Serena is a manipulator and we need to take that into consideration in determining her credibilty here.

I never felt at any time that the Cannon was guilty of rape and I don't completely believe the Serena related Elizabeth version of it, nor the version related by Inman and others. She just wanted sex and so did he and so it goes. It was a routine event for her and for him as well, except in this case it had whatever zest is added to it by the elemnet of involving particularly forbidden fruit.

She got caught at it and certainly had to deny it given her position and her father's. Not too many years ago this would have resulted in a lynching (and did in similar cases), but the circumstances here precluded that and I think believably so.

I guess I have to admit that like the mayor I never really concerned myself over the issue of guilt or innocen

Charles, don't get me wrong - I'll stick up for hippies any day of the week.

I assumed Fanon was guilty until the very end of the book. I felt this is what I was supposed to assume. His boorishness when he met Roger just made me dislike him more than I already did.

Sorry to have missed you all the past week but did "crash" maybe my fault--maybe not but hopefully can rejoin this great chat. Since Ive been off line(I've tried to read all that I've missed, but if Iam repeating please excuse!)At first it seemed TW was writing a novel with plot and characters. Often he seemed more hateful(cynisim?) than satirical for he seemed to destroying the great American--you know the one--young man of lowly means achieving success(Charley) And he buys things--is conspicuious consumption only vulgar when it's self made and not inhereited--maybe the quail plantation was an example of a "living" museum? Wasn't it hostility when TW included so-o-o-o much "rap"(I'm not impressed he wrote it himself) when most of us don't understand it? And how could you believe that a young man of twenty with wife and two children, even a product of flower children's mating be dumb and not know about bus fare--and then escape certain fate because along comes a powerful earthquake--let's get real! These aren't people, they are puppets shaped by "system's" beyond their control and doomed by our(reader's and onlookers) value systems. Well--now on to the ending and maybe learning what I've really missed during my crash!--Yvonne

Arnold,

I think it was Charles and not Walter who asked that relevant question about Fannon's guilt or innocence.

But at any rate I tend to agree with you that the accusation served as a plot device, but I also think it would have been a much better novel had Wolfe used fewer plot contrivances as Yvonne points out.

If the guilt or innocence of Fannon had been more important in the novel, the novel might well have moved on without all that Conrad parking-prison-stoic stuff.

I agree that the novel starts going downhill when Conrad gets the ticket and continues to spiral down at an accelerating pace until the end.

The blurb on the jacket talks about the scope of the novel-settings across the coutry. Once the setting moves from Atlanta the novel disintegrates and by the time it returns it is too late.

I think Wolfe is at his best when he focuses- as in Bonfire's focus on New York City. Atlanta (broadly located to include other Georgia scenes) was an ideal focus- but he lost it.

Jim; Thanks for straightening out that Walter/Charles thing.I was desperatley searching previous posts 'cause I couldn't imagine myself asking such an intelligent question as Charles'!

Walter and Sarah - Sometimes I really don't know what I'm talking about…I believe Ginny is going to post the Updike article and he has a number of onomontoxxxxxx examples. Mine were not to the point, I'm afraid.

Since I'll be away on vacation for the week - I thought I'd throw out some of my thoughts on Chapters 9-16.

The Superfluous Woman - Maybe should have been called The Really, Really Superfluous Woman. In Man in Full, women are superfluous anyway. Once cast aside, they're just MORE superfluous. It's been four years and Martha still can't let go and you want to say "move on", but there's something poignant about her grunting along with Mustafa, no?

The Red Dog - I like the Red Dog metaphor that Peepgas comes up with. He starts hatching his syndication scheme - between that and his 'courting' of Martha, you get the feeling he believes that The Superfluous Man + The Superfluous Woman = A Man in Full. Larry - Much mention of Atlanta Magazine. I remember the last time I was visiting Atlanta, David Justice and some other celebrity (an actress or singer??) were featured and it was a big deal. Is Atlanta Magazine really such a topic??

The Breeding Barn - We've already talked a lot about this scene. I read somewhere that TW threw this in as a spoof on the big "obligatory sex scene" that must be a part of most best sellers…But the thing struck me was the dinner the night before, especially the dessert which included hand cranked peach ice cream wherein I had a Proustian moment. Every summer at granma's house in Columbus, GA we'd gather up ripe peaches and slice them up, get a big ole bag o' salt and hand crank vanilla ice cream with fresh peaches (UuuunnnnnUH!) - how's THAT for onomontoXXXX - I haven't had peach ice cream since. There's No way it's going to taste like that so I don't even bother.

God's Cosmic Joke - Peepgas bitterly sneers at God's Cosmic joke: sex. "Isolde's headlights" was a very funny reference and I liked the call of the opposing lawyers: Indignation and Contempt v.s. Scorn.

Gotcha Back - TW really does a great job with Andre Fleet's speech - evoking the sound and feel of a revival meeting/political rally.

See ya next week!

While reading your past comments, why not change to book's title to "The Conspicuous Man" since the characters seem to always do what will attract the most attention and will make the best image for others--from Freaknik to old men renting cars to pick up dates--selecting home(office) furnishings--to entertaining house quests with horse breeding--to be seen at art openings and trendy restaurents--anything even tho it's in violation of good taste. No wonder it is hard to feel sympathy for any of them and it is so tragic because it is what we see around us. Wouldn't TW have done better with a short story instead of a novel?Some of his writing is electrefying with is vividness, but not throughout this lengthy novel. Yvonne

Yvonne - One gets the feeling that TW immerses himself in his research (a 10 year process)and is compelled to use EVERYTHING he has gathered. I wonder if that's what takes so long - finding a way to use it all.

Charlie

Charles; I was thinking that very thought as I was reading about Conrad.Apparently his only purpose in the book was to introduce Stoicism...and to help poor old Charlie up and down the stairs.

Just dashed in for a minute to put up Charlie's Updike Article: Updike on A Man in Full . It's very interesting, and so are your posts, more later!

Ginny

I think Yvonne nailed it in her last two posts, I quite agree with her assessment. Wolfe is a magician at conjuring up scenes realistically but not his characters - it probably was his intention to paint composite people but, for me, they are "neither fish nor fowl, nor good red meat". I really didn't give a fig about what would happen to them with the possible exception of Conrad.

Eileen Megan

GINNY, Thank you for the Updike on Wolfe! I simply couldn't exist without my weekly New Yorker fix and am beginning to feel that way about SeniorNet. The communication we do with one another is wonderful but the on-going learning experience is the BEST!

Yo Arnold,

Zeus be with you, too; and I suspect you are going to need his help as I can see that you are preparing to defend the book as a coherent whole.

OK- more power to you. You do it well, but I think it is a lost cause.

I don't see it that way. I see the Atlanta segments as coherent and those characters immeadiatley connected to Charley but not Conrad and not the California segments.

I know Wolfe can do Califorina and weird as he did so well in the past, but he has moved on since then with his writing and "Man" could have been a step forward in his development as a major figure in American literature. It could have been a strong blending of satire and social and cultural criticsm- the modern American Don Quixote.

Frankly it's not so much the right stuff leading up to one giant step as it is a stumble and a lurch- but a brilliant stumble and lurch. Maybe his next book whatever that might be.

In another online bookclub a discussion topic has been focused on selecting the American writer of the century. Probably an interesting topic for one of the discussions here- but perhaps not relevant to this one, except to note that nobody has proposed Tom Wolfe as fulfilling that role- several suggest Truman Capote.

Jim, I also had problems understanding how Conrad and the California experience was pertinent to the story in Atlanta. Of course, I saw the tie-in at the end of the book but never felt very satisfied with how Conrad became associated with Charlie. I thought it was really a stretch.

Larry

Yes, Ginny, thanks for the Updike review. It wasn't as negative as I'd expected. I actually thought it was right on - although I rarely disagree with Updike, who's one of my favorite writers!

Jim, I have to agree with you that the California segment did not fit at all with the rest of the book and should have been part of a second, California-based book. Wolfe only has so many more decades left, I guess, and at one book every 10 years, he clearly has to put several books into one just to get his ideas out there. I really enjoyed Conrad's story a lot even though it didn't belong in this book.

Truman Capote as writer of the century? Not if I have a vote.

Jim, Zeus darn it!

We've got to stop greeting each other this way.

Yes, I think for purposes of a robust satire of many aspects of contemporary American culture that the California and ensuing Conrad based sections are appropriate in the novel.

Because the novel is so well crafted in conventional terms you may be taking it more seriously than it was intended. I don't think Wolfe was thinking that he was writing the Great American Novel but that he was just taking a look at the foibles of our society and one of those is the tendency to develop Gurus and popular spiritual and quasi-philosophical movements is one of those.

Remember the craze for Zen back in the 60's and the popularity of "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance"? Maybe now we'll get a "Stoics and the Art of Bob White Shooting" or something like that.

I also recall a rather risque satire from that period called "Candy" (an easily and well forgotten work) that had a female protagonist Candide type who got caught up in a similar craze. Like Man the plot contivances in that satire were excessive- but I think that was part of the satire.

You are right. I do intend to defend the latter part of Man in Full.

Ginny

April 6, 1999 - 01:00 pm

Hi, Everybody:

First I apologize for not getting the head matter up promptly, it's been a hectic few days. I have read and appreciated everyone's comments, and am so glad to be among such close and discerning readers! That doesn't mean I agree with you all, but without you I surely would have missed some interesting points of view.

This section is much too large, it's impossible to do justice to it in only one day, I'm glad we've got quite a few left in the week. The Updike article is amazing to me on several levels. Thanks, Charlie for that one.

Maida, thanks to you also, what heartening words, is The New Yorker as good as that article was? I used to suscribe to it and it changed hands, and didn't look like it was going anywhere but apparently I was dead wrong! Will try to pick up an issue and resubscribe, if you say this article is indicative of the overall quality!

HI, Yvonne, sorry about the crash, we're so glad to have you with us again. Loved your comments. You, too, Sarah and Jim, wonderful insights as per usual, very exciting to read what you all have written, wish I hadn't had to do it so fast.

Won't Charlie be excited over all the good posts when he gets back home?

I don't even know where to start, it seems to me this entire section is a study in contrasts: Charlie and Conrad, both presented with tremendous challenges, both shamed, both threatened at the very level of where it hurts most: two different men, two different solutions, which one was better?

Conrad had the choice, why did he do what he did at the Tow Yard? Was he so trapped by the advancing hour and the extra fee and his wife's scorn that he couldn't come back another day? Is this the decision making of a hero? Did you feel that in a similar situation YOU too would have "lost it?" And then, if all that isn't enough, he refuses parole because he'd have to have pled guilty and he was not guilty? Now, tell me again, why was he NOT guilty? I don't understand this section. I don't have empathy for Conrad here. I think it's a good thing to take a high moral tone, but if your actions belie that purpose then I don't see you've made your point.

Megan, you said you cared about him more than any other? Why??

Is it because I know it's stupid to vault over a fence and get in a shoving match with the man manhandling your car on a lot? Does Conrad lack an innate sense of self preservation? Is this the Hippie parent's influence??

OK, that's Conrad. Who will save Conrad??

Who will save Martha? Her friend, Joyce Newman? Her $20,000 table at the Art Show? Do you think it's feasible that she would even consider spending such a sum for nothing? If she is from Old Money Virginia she knows darn well that she can't buy herself INTO Society, that's just money down the drain. It's funny, I was reading about the Invisible Martha at the tire store last week when I had the very same thing happen to me, and I'm not divorced, but I was invisible. It's an eerie feeling, but I didn't want to spend $20,000 to try to impress anybody, decided I was happier being invisible.

Who or what can save Charlie Croker? The Breeding Barn Chapter is the perfect answer to my earlier question of "What's not to like?" Ok, here are a few things, now surfacing, "In dealing with subordinates and women, never justify, never explain, never back off." Women as substandard "things." OK, burning. It's totally amazing what some people in some parts of the country consider impressive entertainment for guests, and I hate to say it, because I know a LOT of you feel Wolfe is over the top with this book, but I have to say he's right on here, again. The burning. Charlie lost me with the burning, the turtles, just like he lost the Richman's. How can he be such a Neanderthal? Why would Wolfe have put The Breeding Barn episode in the book? Just to be outre? The burning takes up very little space, but it's worse, to me. Charlie can't understand why the Richmans would not have been impressed, so he falls back on some old Anti-Semitism lurking around and makes his Freudian slip, thus ensuring that he won't save himself or that Richman won't save him, either (note the name Rich Man). Once again, Wolfe throws in campy names, and every time he does, I stop in wonder. Clockett, Paddett, Skynnham, & Glote I don't understand, I really don't. To me, this ruins what otherwise might have been a very good book.

Now Arnold had a very interesting point about the Mayor: " I would nominate him for the one character that Wolfe uses to reveal himself- the candid and cynical observer part of him anyway. "

That makes me wonder just who IS the narrator of this piece, anyway? Whose voice? And is this a cynical satiric piece, or, with some of the key "hallmarks" of satire, the names of the companies for example, the excesses, removed, would this, in fact, be a perfectly serious look at society today, whether in California or New York and what, I wonder, caused Wolfe to take this bent?? I mean, when I see the name of a Law Firm like Clockett, Paddett, Skynnham, & Glote , I almost feel like the author is saying to me, Listen, this is supposed to be funny, you might not be getting it, so here's a hard PUSH. But I don't get "hatefulness" or nastiness from Wolfe's writing, I don't get the sense of despair and depression I do from Updike, nor the hopelessness of modern life I do from Yates, so I don't understand.

Now, why is Wolfe doing this? I personally think the writing is really well done, in this section, perhaps the plot might be a little contrived: Martha AND Charlie will take a table at the Art Show for different reasons, Charlie is humiliated by Peepgas' releasing of the red dog, and really, the events continue in such a way, you almost feel sorry for Charlie here, Sorry, Charlie, can you bounce back and foil Peepgas and his pilots?? Charlie's humiliation is complete, but he puts on overhauls and throws a wrench into the plane engine??? NOBODY saw him go? UhhhhhHuhhhhhhhh.

I also like Arnold's statement, "Yes, I think for purposes of a robust satire of many aspects of contemporary American culture that the California and ensuing Conrad based sections are appropriate in the novel." I'm not having a problem with Conrad's California experience, but I think the transitions are too blunt and confusing, it takes you a while to get mentally in sinc with the new location. I also agree it's well written, am not sure, tho, about well "crafted," as the plot devices are beginning to overwhelm this reader, anyway. I like the way Wolfe writes. To the extent that he has chosen very unlikeable characters, I still think he's doing a brave job.

What/ who can save Peepgas? Can he hope to take over Charlie's empire, how intelligent is that?

Which character here, Charlie, Peepgas, Conrad, or Roger Too White actually is doing the best job of thinking? Is Wolfe saying that in our modern world, it's just overcome this obstacle and that obstacle and there's nothing else? Do we have a character who is actually an intellectual? I note that Charlie hates references to literature, is the point, perhaps, that the only hope today lies in the highly literate (who are not present)?

Does anybody know the explanation for the lyrics of the hymn (IS it an old hymn?) "Won't You Stay Here in the Garden Next Time, Eve?" I would think, in the light of the Bibical reference, that to stay would be sort of...well, ironic? "In Adam's Fall We Sinned, All."

Are Conrad's children likely to respect this: "It was an example he would hold up to them, proudly, when they were old enough to appreciate what he had done and why he had made such a scarifice." (Page 154). If that had happened in YOUR family, would you be more or less likely to appreciate Conrad's motive in not pleading guilty and accepting parole?

Ginny

Eileen Megan

April 6, 1999 - 01:43 pm

Ginny, maybe it's because I know a "Conrad" type of person who is dear to my heart. Forever doing stupid things but clearly doesn't see that he almost constantly makes bad choices and then suffers the consequences in bewilderment. My "Conrad" evokes my pity, aggravation and despair all at the same time!

Eileen Megan

Yvonne T. Skole

April 6, 1999 - 07:27 pm

What's happened here, did Florence really leave us--I was in hopes she'd stay and share with us why she thought this best seller was worthless. Since we're coming to the home stretch here let me send hugs,valentines, kisses, gleeful clapping of hands for all the posted reference matertial--it has been great! Also add a personal note here--my daughter, although raised in the ccity, has an animal science degree from Purdue(the university well known for it's astronauts and women basketball players) and has her own horse stable where she breeds and trains Arabians where "blood lines" are more important than anything else.Yvonne

Twowood

April 7, 1999 - 04:09 am

Hi Ginny; "Invisible Martha"...that phrase pretty well summed up the old girl,but haven't we all been there at one time or another? Invisible,that is. Nevertheless,I found Martha to the most believable character in the book.

Ginny

April 7, 1999 - 06:56 am

Walter, I thought Martha was believable, too, as far as I've read, anyway, but she doesn't have a whole lot of stuff to do in this book, except be thrown aside at 53, and "invisible." I think we can all relate, as we've all been invisible, as you point out, from time to time. SHE, at least, makes some positive decisions: tone up, get healthy, and possibly some stupid ones, I still, reading along with the schedule, don't know what she'll do about the $20,000 table. I kind of like reading like this, actually, it's like the old segments that Dickens and others published in and you can keep fresh your instant reader's impressions as you go.

Megan, I wonder how much of Conrad's inappropriate decision making stems from his flaky parents? Somebody asked a while back what there was to object to in his handling of his own child's temper tantrum? I think that it's been proven a million times that people tend to replicate their own upbringings, for better or worse, unless they take active measures to change. Conrad feels nothing when the child says Shut Up. I was under the impression Dad was an alcoholic and thus was probably prone to less than perfect tantrums himself, will go back and look, but that seemed unrealistic to me at the time. Conrad wasn't making an EFFORT to change a response, he didn't HAVE a response. What the heck is the matter with wifey, by the way, why can't SHE get a job and help out? Why DO people make all the wrong choices?

Yvonne: I don't know what happened to Florence, maybe she'll come back in. We're not thru yet, just up to Chapter XVI today, in fact, taking a hard look at the character development and plot. So your daughter would know about the Breeding Barn episode. How about ask her if she considers that fitting entertainment for guests and whether the facts are (and I am pretty sure they are) accurate? Wolfe did a lot of homework, (10 YEARS!!) and only rarely as we've seen, gets a little thing wrong.

I have a horse, and I know Pat Westerdale has several or her children do, too, and one just had a foal, and frankly there's more about certain parts of the horse anatomy than I ever wanted to know which seem to require attention from time to time. As a matter of fact, we just went THRU quite an experience, but it's not something that you'd show dinner guests. I think Charlie's reduction of the entire world to male/ female is ingenuous, doesn't ring true for me. I think he wanted to dance in on the lead of a stallion (it's a miracle he wasn't dragged in the dust) and be the ringmaster, but once again, he badly misjudged his audience. I wonder what makes Serena such an expert in all matters and why Charlie himself couldn't SEE the impression he was making?

Ginny

Ginny

April 7, 1999 - 07:04 am

OK, also the schedule is now changed, Larry called my attention to a misprint there, so we should be good to go, thanks, Larry!

Ginny

Larry Hanna

April 7, 1999 - 07:08 am

Ginny, I felt that Conrad had a lot more backbone than he showed with his wife. He might have been able to deal with his wife but that Mother-in-Law was something else and it appears he just gave up on the situation. Regardless of what he tried to do it just wasn't right. His jail experiences, however, indicated that there was a lot more to his character than just giving in.

I did feel that the mix-up of the book that he got in jail stretches the imagination a lot, but guess the plot required that so he would get involved with the philosophy.

Larry

Helen

April 7, 1999 - 10:09 am

Although I don't find this book to be so compelling that I cannot wait to get to it, I do find that I am being exposed to parts of Americana that are not readily available to me and are fascinating. I must add to the sentiments of the rest of the group that I do believe that TW could use a good editor.

Discrete descriptions such as the hunting scene at the plantation, the Freezer unit and what life was like there for the workers, the breeding barn, the attitude of some southerners towards Blacks and Jews (So how come Serena is socially savvy and Charlie such a blundering insensitive fool).

And what about the arrangements of the young women who work for the big corporations to teach the customers about art??? Oh please, just another form of pimping…but with a more respectable façade.

Helen

April 7, 1999 - 10:14 am

Interesting article in The New York Times today about the long term effects on children where one or both parents have been (incarcerated)part of the criminal justice system. Coiuldn't help but think of the jail scenes in the book and feel some despair for our current and future population after reading same. You might want to check it out if you have the time.

Prisons and Children

patwest

April 7, 1999 - 04:02 pm

Helen: I read the article this morning. Very informative. In our small town, since rent is cheap, there are several families who have a father in the medium security prison in Galesburg, 17 miles. They are all on welfare and the children are often difficult to handle at school. Poor attitudes, no ambitions and no goals. I wish I could motivate some of the brighter ones. But there aren't too many with above average IQ's.

Ginny

April 8, 1999 - 04:01 am

Helen, that's a great article, thanks so much! And Pat, I read recently that a baby who is not responded to immediately when the baby makes his first sounds: the length of time it takes the mother to respond, the very seconds, either makes the brain connections strong or fails to, and the child is forever less facile verbally than his counterparts. Some very important connections at that early stage of life are either made or not, by somebody. I guess if you had a family of 11, somebody other than the mother could respond. This is the new thinking on the development of the brain, scarey, hah? They did say it WAS possible to sort of catch up in later years, but verbal ability or gift would be forever lost. Does that mean we here have our mothers to thank (or fathers) for more than we thought?

Larry, so you are responding to Conrad's attempt to do the right thing, even though he may be overwhelmed by Dr. Otey's former wife? I guess Conrad's wife is his weakness, in that he allows her mother, (and HER) to overwhelm him emotionally so that he doesn't make the best judgments. Otherwise he'd not have gone over the fence, whether it was "right" or not. I now feel more compassion for him.

What was it Updike said in that article? If the author brings to life a character who previously didn't exist? This morning the fire alarm went off at 6:24 am, not BRANNG but beep beep, but it still managed to call the Fire Department, and I couldn't remember the password, and I'm not Charlie Croker, but I sure did think of him. So I can't seem to get him out of my mind, do you think of him at odd moments?

I wonder about modern literature this morning, I wonder if we're in the age of the....not anti hero, flawed and bleeding hero?

Is this part, I wonder, of our national psyche? That our Presidents are flawed, and our Congress is flawed, our heroes, even the great Joltin Joe are flawed, and all men are flawed to the point that a church would want Eve to remain in the garden this time? Can't get over that?

Ginny

Jim Olson

April 8, 1999 - 07:37 am

 
Hi Arnold, 

I see our buddy Zeus has been playing tricks on you and showering 
Arizona with snow while some of us up north are in sunshine. 

Just remember to be a stoic about it. He is just testing you. 

You make some good points but we'll have to agree to disagree on 
some of the qualities we each see in the book. 

I think we do agree on one main aspect though but probabaly not 
in the details, and that is that there is considerable humor in 
the novel if one has a perhaps particular sadistic or sometimes 
ribald sense of humor and maybe there are even some delicate 
touches as well. 

I found the horsey scene funny but I guess not many others did.  
One element  that Ginny points being the very inappropriateness 
of the occasion adds to the satire of Charlie as a cracker bufoon 
(ala LBJ as a good old boy bufoon- with no disrepect intended to 
LBJ whom I admire in many ways- except for the war that will 
forever blot out his accomplishments as president.) I don't have 
the book any more but maybe it was in that same chapter that 
Charley outdid himself in the cracker bufoon dept with that slip 
of the tongue calling herb "Heeb." Which slip Herb did not view 
as funny. None of the characters with the possible exception on 
Martha seems to have a sense of humor. I found her (it was hers 
wasn't it?) phrase "boys with breasts- note the word play 
alliteration) to be an apt satiric phrase to describe the women 
she is talking about. She seems to have a mild sense of self 
satire as well that is missing anywhere else in the book. 

In the Mad Magazine mode of humor which seems to be a male thing 
mainly I laughed at the mooning scene in the freaknic 
description. 

Took me back to the war protest days when mooning was the 
accepted mode of expressing disrepect- dissing as it were. 
I was a little too old for it then (maybe as I reach my second 
childhood it will come back) but remember it. 

Appropriate to that era I found Conrad's bus adventures 
reminiscent of that old satrical protest song that had the  
narrator trapped in the bus unable to get off because he had gone 
beyond his transfer destination and needed another fare that he 
didn't have- or was it a subway?  It was some public 
transportation mired in authority and regulation. Wasn't it in 
Boston? 

Arlo Guthrie is coming to this area in concert and I hope he will 
do that song and I'm sure his Alice's Restaurtant. 

Maybe Wolfe is trying to bring back the satrical humor of 
anti-establishment popular culture of that period. Certainly he 
is taking on a number of "establishment" icons- the banking 
system- real estate development- the bus system - the police 
parking regulations- the prison system- the football craze- 
the modern art nonsense. 

In including the prison aspects, I must admit that I found no 
humor in the prison scenes except maybe for that little irony in 
how Conrad got the Stoics book in the first place through a 
confusion of author's names. 

Speaking of Alice's restaurant, I find that modern rap of protest 
or otherwise is completely devoid of humor. Man in Full wasn't .

SarahT

April 8, 1999 - 11:16 am

Ginny: Conrad WAS guilty of a crime and should have taken a plea bargain to avoid being in that hell-hole! His attitude was practically delusional, I thought. His sense of nobility and self righteousness was pathetic. We just don't get to lose it and go off on someone in a rage and not pay for our actions. It's not that I didn't like him at all, but I thought his sense of being wronged was completely "off." He seemed "off" in a lot of ways, actually -- not at all in touch with reality.

I was also annoyed by the constant use of cute names; every time TW introduced a new name, I found myself distracted by the need to figure out why it was funny.

Boy, I'm cranky today!

Ed Zivitz

April 8, 1999 - 04:26 pm

Hi: Is Conrad the anti-hero or of such low self-esteem that he cannot make decisions in his own best interest. anyone remember the movie FALLING DOWN,where Michael Douglas goes beserk & cannot get change from a convienence store until he buys something ( Store also owned by an Asian)..Is TW doing some stereotyping here?

Regarding the breeding barn,I've read that when elephants copulate in captivity, for purposes of reproduction it's sometimes necessary to have someone to guide the process along.

Twowood

April 9, 1999 - 07:10 am

Jim; You're right,it was the commuter railway line in Boston...the MTA or something like that.

Sarah; I agree with your appraisal of Conrad. Facing a prison sentence,one would think he'd have leaped at probation.Which brings up another point...it takes a lot more than an assault charge for a first offendor be sent to prison these days.

Arnold Grey

April 9, 1999 - 12:05 pm

Jim,

I see you are beginning to see some of the satrirical values in Man in Full. I agree with your assesment of humor in the novel.

I wonder if we would also both agree that we can't really expect full characterization when we are dealing with sometimes heavy handed but still effective satire.

One quibble I do have with Wolfe is his treatment of age and its limitations. I see from some of your references that we are probably pretty much in the same generation and well past the age of any of the characters in the novel. I didn't notice anyone past 65 if there were any that old.

Martha at 53, for example, is seen as past the age where a new career is possible, yet I know a number of women who started new or second careers at that age. A friend of mine just got her law degree at 62- another her journalism degree at 76 and on and on.

Maybe medical school has passed Martha by but I wouldn't count it out either.

Peepgas finds her sexy enough at 53 but wonders what she will be like in her sixties- Well, she won't be a boy with breasts if that is what he is after but he may be surprized at what he finds in terms of sex appeal.

But then from some meagre info I have about the subject, the discarding of the old wife for a younger trophy model is not really about sex at all. I know two women who have gone through this who have been very frank in discussing it and both say it happened at a time when sexual relations with their husbands was as good or better than it had ever been in the marriage.

The cause was somewhere else within the complex relationships that develop over time between a man and a women and cause a man to look for a boy with breasts. Wolfe doesn't explore these - or does he? But then that is not the type of novel he is writing.

Yvonne T. Skole

April 9, 1999 - 12:42 pm

Arnold--Am in agreement with most of your points which was part of my earlier remarks that this is a poorly developed novel. It seems more about "systems" and how people both individually and as a class are victims. Since Wolfe is seventy re-enforces this. What's more if any remember Woodstock, E. Pressley, the Civil Rights action of the 60's--none of TW's scene's are new--so is he writing for the baby boomers?--or maybe he's writing for an ever younger group since his contrived names and titles are so juvenile.-Yvonne

Eileen Megan

April 9, 1999 - 01:37 pm

I think the song you're looking for is "The Man Who Never Returned" about "Charlie" and the MTA - I found a parody of it "Charlie and the EPA" which credited the Kingston Trio with the original song "MTA". Tried to find it but drew a blank.

Eileen Megan

Ginny

April 10, 1999 - 05:34 am

Megan, I remember the lyrics to one song, is this it?

He went to ride on the MTA:
But will he ever return?
No, he'll never return.
And his fate is still unlearned.
He may ride forever 'neath the streets of Boston,
He's the man who'll never return.

Someday there will be a huge contest in the world and those who can sing jingles and snatches will be rulers of the Universe, and we Stoics who CAN do, will!

Ginny

Ginny

April 10, 1999 - 05:55 am

I'm running behind with tomorrow's selections, lack one chapter, but can already see some fierce plot manipulation, so can't wait to hear your opinions of the next group but for now, just to say:

Yvonne: great perspective: just who IS the book written for? Who the intended audience? This next chapter almost suggests that it's simply lack of knowledge or training that our poor Conrad does as he does, acts as he acts, and enlightenment in the form of Epictetus literally opens the doors of Hell. Well.

I may get cynical myself here.

Arnold and Jim: If it's such a great satire, wouldn't satire depend upon the contrast of normalcy? Is Martha the only person held above ridicule of her follies, and surely nobody would consider her a major character? Now that I see she DID take the $20,000 table, I'm afraid she's portrayed as satirically as the next man. "Satire is a sort of glass wherein beholders do generally discover everybody's face but their own, which is the chief reason for that kind of reception it meets in the world and that so very few are offended with it."--Swift

Apparently there are two types of satire: Juvenalian satire: a biting, morally indignant expose of evil and corruption, and Horatian, a gently humorous satire that aims to correct through laughter, according to Benet's Reader's Encyclopedia. This wouldn't seem to fit either.

Arnold, I noticed that about age, too, note the "old" man in the prison, about 45!! (That's not old for prisons, is it??) Walter will know, but Gotti Sr. is certainly not under 45, and he's in prison. Martha could certainly do something at 53, and she's in Atlanta where universities abound. No excuse, if that's what she wants.

Walter: is there any possiblilty that the laws in CA are more stringent than in NYC and that a first offender WOULD go to jail like this?? Or wonder if they're likely to be LESS harsh?

Sarah and Larry: This next set of chapters seems to be trying to indicate that Conrad, tho possesing the WILL to be corageous and morally right, just lacked the education to know what was right until he fortuituosly got the book of Stoic philosophy. So he was going by his own moral compass which was skewed by his lack of exposure to correct models (hippie parents) and, I guess, total lack of exposure to stoic philosophy. They don't normally teach Stoic philosophy in high school, I wonder if this is Wolfe's denunciation of the lack of exposure to religion in the home today? How could Conrad be so lacking in any kind of knowledge of a power called God? By whatever name??

Ed: By "stereotype" do you mean the characters are lacking in depth and are just caricatures? Which character is the least stereotypical and most real, would you think? Your response will be interesting, is it a minor character??

Jim: Yes, it was in the Breeding Barn chapter that Charlie made his slip, and we note Herb Richman later regaling his tablemates including Peepgas over Charlie's general buffonery, so even those with high moral tone AT the barn end up no better than their host.

Anti-estiablishment? In these next chapters, there seems to be an entire army out there in the shadows who represent just what you suggest, I sure hope, reading along as I am, that there WILL be some sort of conclusion which makes a point at the end of the book.

These next chapters seem to me to be deliberately contrasting the "good" and "best" of society (the High Museum's Gala) and it's undercover of nastiness, with the "worst" and "nastiest" of society (the prison)....will be interesting to see if you think Wolfe succeeded and what is presented as an antidote?

IS there an antidote? And WHERE is it?

I have a grape customer who is the Choir Director of a huge black church here in town, and I hope to ask him next week about "Won't you Stay Here in the Garden Next Time Eve?" next week.

Ginny

Ed Zivitz

April 10, 1999 - 08:10 am

Hi: Ginny:First,I don't have a problem with stereotyping,because I think it broadens the satire and if you are able to laugh at yourself & your background & your cultural upbringing,I find that to be something healthy.

We all,as individuals and as part of a larger group,have our own idiosyncrasies,and these peculiarities provide a rich vein of humor when directed inward. This may offend a lot of people,but political correctness is for the birds and I think that TW,by being politically incorrect (in my estimation) and by stereotyping has produced an uproarious novel.

I've met very few people like Charlie Croker,and mostly on trips to the South, but he seems to fit the image of the good ol boy. On the other hand, I've met people like Fanon the Cannon,and TW has him down pat.

For me,this is an enjoyable book providing much out loud laughter,but then some people will say that the unexamined life is not worth living,but for me life's too short to really take seriously (too much existential angst).

Eileen Megan

April 10, 1999 - 08:42 am

Ginny, I think that's it, imagine you knowing, what I thought was, a local song about the MTA!

I gave my TW book to my son so can't comment on any particular scenes.

Eileen Megan

Ginny

April 10, 1999 - 02:17 pm

And here's another thing I just thought of driving back in the car, we don't have any middle of the road black people in the whole book! Think about it. Our extremems are the Mayor of Atlanta, a smart Howard Lawyer, and the prisoners who speak rap. Nothing in the middle.

hah??

Ginny

Yvonne T. Skole

April 10, 1999 - 05:35 pm

Ginny--Maybe you have found the key--the purpose of the book--there seems to be a lack of "good middle-class", American style. As in "Magic Mountain" we're presented with extremes--None convincing--can we blame the lack of good editing? Or is TW so ego-compeled that spending lots of time collecting material that he has to include it. I am intrigued that TW choose Epicurus as a central figure who lived before Christ, around 300 BC!Yvonne

SarahT

April 10, 1999 - 06:41 pm

Just a bit of local information apropos of Conrad's imprisonment - there is a huge uproar out here over conditions at Santa Rita jail (yes, it exists) where guards are being accused of brutality and there are planned protests.

I thought Martha was as much a stereotype as anyone else in the book - the older, spreading, ex-wife left for a younger woman. By the way, I never responded to your point, Ginny, that Martha was from too good a background to think that buying a table at a fancy art exhibit would put her back in the thick of things - or to fall for a twerp like Pipsqueak - I mean Peepgas. I agree.

Charlie Croker - stereotypical good old boy

Serena - stereotypical trophy wife

Roger - stereotypical black upper class lawyer

Mayor - stereotypical showboat a la my own Willie Brown

Coach - stereotypical fat, amoral ex-jock who only cares about sports

Fanon - stereotypical obnoxious athlete

Peepgass - stereotypical middle manager with delusions of grandeur

Conrad - stereotypical working class uneducated guy who gets himself into a heap of trouble. He's actually the hardest to peg - not sure he really is a stereotype. Usually guys like this don't end up in jail. They just go nowhere with their lives.

I did not believe for a moment that Conrad had the intellectual skill to "get" Epictetus (or even to attempt to read it). It was the most contrived part of the book for me (although the ending came pretty close!)

Ginny

April 11, 1999 - 07:11 am

Yvonne, the thing IS, there are PLENTY of middle class back people, loads. Here's what shocked me: the cynicism I'm getting. In looking at the disaster footage of the tornadoes in Ohio, there was a perfectly nice looking black rescue worker speaking, but ol me narrowed my eyes and thought, AHA, where is all that (I had just read the prison chapter) hubbo ho stuff? And caught myself up with a shock!! (tend to get immersed in books I read). We have, literally, hundreds of black grape customers of what appears to be every walk of life, and not one, NOT ONE, has ever spoken any at all differently than I do. Not one. And of our field hands, when we HAD field hands in the old days, one was the famous "AX Murderer of Woodruff," and it's true I haven't seen him since he was sentenced, but he was out on parole and came by and he spoke no differently than I did. This book needs some middle people.

Conrad could be a representative of blue collar America, but where are the "middle class" people?? Of course, TW would probably say, I'm not writing a treatise on American culture, for Pete's sake!! I'm contrasting these particular people, for Pete's sake!! YOU write a book! hahahahhaah Wish I could.

Sarah: I love your list!! Who would we say ARE the three main characters, anyway, Charlie, Conrad and Peepgas?

Somebody needs to go look at some Epictetus and see how hard it IS to read for the first time. Wonder if it's online? Copyright should have expired, that's for sure?

It appears TW was dead "on" on the High Museum, tho. Take a look at the illustration of it in the heading, pretty sharp looking, but the offerings are less than exciting, to me, anyway. Pretty contemporary. I am grateful to know the origin of the furniture in the museum and want to go see these monstrous pieces now. The Wall Street Journal Friday had a marvelous article with our old friend of the Books, Thomas Hoving quoted, on what a sorry job museums DO to present their collections. Wrote him and received a very charming response, can't wait to read his new book Art for Dummies , he says he's got an entire section on WHAT you really want to see in WHAT museum.

I remember his comment so well as we stood before the Bury St. Edmund's Cross, that if HE had been the Director of the Cloisters (which of course, he was once before becoming Director of the Metropolitan Museum of Art for....10 years??) anyway, HE, upon learning that a group of cross enthusiasts were present, he would have taken them into chambers and taken the cross APART (it comes apart) to show how it was transported. There aren't many men like him.

Here's the site for the High Museum of Art in Atlanta

I'm not saying that the dialogue is OFF or INCORRECT for the prison listed, au contraire, I bet it's perfect, I'm just saying that there are tons, the majority of black people who do NOT speak that way, and they aren't all rich lawyers and mayors of major cities.

So now, we're in our new section, plese tell me what was the big deal about the speech of the Director of the High Museum of Art at the dinner??

Who were you in sinc with at the dinner? The majority of attendees or Charlie??

Did you notice the comparison of noise between the prison at night and the diners??

Ginny

Ginny

April 11, 1999 - 07:18 am

Ed: This was a marvelous point, " I don't have a problem with stereotyping,because I think it broadens the satire and if you are able to laugh at yourself & your background & your cultural upbringing,I find that to be something healthy.

We all,as individuals and as part of a larger group,have our own idiosyncrasies,and these peculiarities provide a rich vein of humor when directed inward. "

That's well said, as usual, ED!! My problem here is that I'm not represented in the book? (If I don't get off the computer I may be the cast off wife, and lots of times I AM ignored on these boards, but other than that I'm not there!)

So I have to laugh at others?!?

Ginny

Arnold Grey

April 11, 1999 - 08:23 am

I think we have to give Wolfe credit for all he has accomplished in A Man in Full. He didn't give us a complete and well developed picture of American society in all its aspects. But he has given us a sharp, humorous, and insightful look at some of our major foibles. Like Ed I'm very happy with that.

In addition he has given us a more serious and sometimes frightening look at some major social problems. There are prisons like the one he describes - indeed as one poster points out the very one he describes. There are people like Charley drawing huge undeserved salaries from corporations at the same time as reductions in work force are exacerbating already unhealthy working conditions. There are TV ads that proudly proclaim upbeat happy family themes while the product produced comes from exploitation of child labor and practically slave labor conditions abroad (and at home).

There are crack houses that produce human rodents. There is a corporate value system that produces broken marriages and families. There is a media nurtured false standard of beauty and desire that extols "boys with breasts." There is a prevalent system of athletic values that ignores the amoral and puts a veneer of false heroic social accomplishment on pure greed and ignorance. And on and on.

That Wolfe manages to tie so much of this together at all is quite an accomplishment. Jim points out quite well that he doesn't do it without resorting to some smoke and mirror writing tricks. I'm just glad he knows how to use those tricks- even the ending ones.

Hey Jim,

That little snow storm Zeus sent us at Easter was just a reminder of how bad it gets up north. Zeus helps those who help themselves. Move on down here and enjoy.

Speaking of enjoy I'm sure glad Eve did leave Ginny's garden and join the rest of us sinners west of Eden

B. Tubbs

April 11, 1999 - 09:42 am

North Shore, Long Island, New York

Have been following the postings but have not had the time to stop and get my thoughts together to comment on the comments.

One thing that comes to mind is that we must remember that Wolfe is primarily a reporter and in that he does a magnificent job. His research is excellent and he does place the who, what, where and why in very graphic settings....in some ways I am reminded of Dickens...the interesting and satirical names...the length of the finished work....and the fact that it could be serialized so easily...

I read the book almost in one sitting and enjoyed it immensely. It was a good read and certainly moved well and kept you going...didn't want to put it down...also didn't want to lose the momentum and lose the multiple cast of characters by a hiatus.

Now that I am rereading it...it does not seem that compelling...perhaps because it is what it is...and that isn't subtle...are we trying to put our own chatacterizations and delving into characters that are not very deep?

On to the next .... really love reading all the comments even when I can't put in my own two cents.

Bettilu

SarahT

April 11, 1999 - 09:45 am

From the quotes of Epictetus in the book, it just didn't strike me that Conrad would have stuck with it.

I finally looked at the Atlanta mansions up top. I'd never dreamed they were that ostentatious. I felt as if I was in the Loire Valley! I expected them to look more like the photo of the museum you posted.

Ginny

April 11, 1999 - 12:56 pm

Hey, running in to say one more thing, before commenting on the great posts later, all thru the last few chapters this little bell has kept ringing in my head: Satyricon , Satyricon .

Finally took the time to look up the spelling and find it's by Petronius Arbiter (Gaius) (d. A.D.65) Arbiter of taste to Nero?!? Tacitus describes Petronius as a "man of polished luxury, indolent in his ordinary life, but capable of energy in public affairs, aping vice." Sienkiewicz gave an idealized portrait of him in his "Quo Vadis." Anyway the Satyricon describes the disreputable adventures of two men and their serving boy. It is satirical and picaresque...The principal episode is the "Banquet of Trimalchio, in which a vulgar, wealthy parvenu, simple and good natured (sound familiar?) gives a banquet to which the adventurers gain admission."

Petronius describes the "ostentatious display of wealth in the decoration of the house and in the profusion of fantastic dishes set before the guests, the grotesque incidents of the banquet, the comical conversation of the guests, and absurd conduct of Trimalchio as he becomes more and more drunk."

Here's another good quote, "The whole work gives an extraordinarily dramatic picture of Italian life in Nero's time, and reproduces in the conversation of some of the characters the actual speech of the lower classes, with amusing bits of slang (such as 'olim oliorum' (ages ago)."--The Oxford Companion to Classical Literature

Nothing new under the sun, eh??

Ginny

Yvonne T. Skole

April 11, 1999 - 03:20 pm

Well, here's Yvonne --with egg on her face! I'm doing research on Epicurus--and it was Epictetus--a couple centuries later that I should have been studying--but you know how it is all those BC Greek philoshers sound alike to me--Conrad is not the low man on the totem pole--hope I didn't confuse anyone--Yvonne.

Jim Olson

April 11, 1999 - 05:15 pm

I agree with Ed and Arnold about the many values of Man in Full but still find the "smoke and mirrors" in the latter part of the book to detract from its overall quality.

The prison scenes are important and tend to redeem some of the rest of the stuff, but I found all of that long boring effort to get Conrad connected to Charley to be excessive without really adding anything other than rather dubious plot value.

Hey Arnold,

What is with that West of Eden allusion you made? Is that from Milton? Now there is a writer who could do an ending as he did in Samson Agonistes and Paradise Lost.

Speaking of the Old Testament, I've started the next book, the Poisonwood Bible- have a copy of your old testament handy when you read that one. Wolfe could take a lesson from Kingslover in tight construction of a novel- not a wasted word so far in the two sections I have read.

Why don't you read it, Arnold? Maybe we could find more to agree about in that one. There is even some satirical humor in it, but Kingslover doesn't hit you over the head with it the way Wolfe does- but lets it in gently and unobtrusively.

Don't worry about how Zeus is treating us up north. While he is pouring down heat on southern Arizona next summer I'll catch a cool breeze off the Chippewa River, and may even tool across the state to Door County and sit on a veranda drinking native cherry wine while watching sail boats frolic on Lake Michigan.

That will be more in keeping with Epicurius than Epictitus (sp) as Yvonne points out in her corrected reference. I wasn't going to say anything, but I recall reading those two years ago in the college humanities class where I met my wife to be- just last month celebrating our fiftieth and I won't say which philosopher we follwed the most over that period. little of each I guess.

Ginny

April 12, 1999 - 08:01 am

Yvonne, EGG? Please!! You are among friends here, we've all had omeletta con fromaggio on our faces here, in fact so much so that we can probably rename the Book Club Online to the Breakfast Book Club!! (Kind of reminds you of Don McNeil doesn't it? Read a chapter and march around the Breakfast Table. Do any of you remember that? Can it be that we in America actually DID that?)

Anyway, the entire purpose of the book clubs here is to share our ideas about books and to chat with each other, there are no tests and nobody's keeping score. Besides, I had to look up the spelling of Satyricon (I hope that losing the ability to spell is not an indicator of anything, because if it is, I'm doomed)...have a TIME with ecstatic! Am not going to spell check that one, either, but can never spell it. It's when you start putting apostrophes in words that don't want any that you start to worry, sometimes I feel that another person entirely is typing my words.

What have you found on either one? ahhahaahahahaa

More than anybody else has put here, I bet!

Ginny

Yvonne T. Skole

April 12, 1999 - 12:16 pm

Thank you all for your reassuring support. Making a mistake doesn't bother me as much as developing a "knee jerk" mentality that is bothersome--One of my reasons for re-reading MM wondering if it still had the deep meaning for me that it once had. And now a case in point in our current book--when we're told Conrad's parents were "hippies" or flower children--and what was the reader's reaction--frankly if Conrad had no parental guidance during his twenty yearsand without any street smarts he would have been in trouble with the law long, long before he was--and then to read Greek philosophy--where's the creditability? TW's writing about St. Rita's was indeed powerful but for what purpose--well, I've read your nightmare, so I can write mine. So what have we here 740 pages with some vivid words with a dust jacket of hype so well packaged that it hits the best seller list-whose joke? Yvonne

Ginny

April 12, 1999 - 01:22 pm

Tom Wolfe speaks:

"[The Internet is] the greatest time-waster of all time. We don't need another time-waster in America. I don't believe the Internet is going to change human nature in the slightest."

Tom Wolfe, Author, Quoted in Business 2.0, February 1999, requoted in PC Computing May 1999 issue.

Ginny

Ginny

April 12, 1999 - 01:41 pm

And Arnold is right, again, there are a lot of well written parts in the book, even scary (I thought the prison stuff was scary). I've always maintained Charlie Croker's personna was "right on," but Epictetus sure got a lot of help, didn't he, with the Earthquake?

The first time I read the book I read it fast and just loved it, up to a point. The fourth time thru a lot of inconsistencies show up, sorry, but they do.

I DO admire a writer whose vocabulary makes me look up words, and in this section, "muntins, gadrooned," and "puttees" sent me to the dictionary, "tropes and sententiae" was cute, tho. I knew "architrave."

Arnold, this is as good as Wolfe, "There is a prevalent system of athletic values that ignores the amoral and puts a veneer of false heroic social accomplishment on pure greed and ignorance. " That's great as well as also true, but was that brought out well in Farnon?

This "boys with breasts" stuff puzzles me, I thought that the ideal of womenhood was health, and apparently Wolfe thinks it's avoirdupois, while having each male character notice intimately the proportions of each female character.

I think I better wait and let Arnold explain the Garden remark, hey, I'm good, but not THAT good! hahahaaha

Waiting for a call back on the spiritual, think I'll let the guy I know who teaches prisoners who study for the G.E.D. go, tho, will take Wolfe's word on it, don't need to be drowned in it. BOOM CHAKKA

Sarah, it's amazing how, when you read a book, the subjects in the book stand out in the news, isn't it? The prison in your news and Freaknik in ours: apparently lots of black students are heading for the beaches this year instead of Freaknik for the very reasons Wolfe remarks on.

Jim: Many congratulations on your 50th Wedding Anniversary, that's something we won't see in this book, I have a feeling.

Yvonne: I've been wondering about the "whys" in the book myself, the "meanings," in fact I'm now wondering why Roger Too White messed up so badly, will finish the book tomorrow and I hope I see!

How likely, how credible IS it that the Mayor could call on the Bank to forgive $175 million in debt?

Ginny

Larry Hanna

April 12, 1999 - 01:55 pm

This is not directly involved with the book, but in today's paper was an article about the sale of the residence and the farm that singer Kenny Rogers has in the Atlanta/Athens area and it gave a website for his farm. He is asking $11 million for the 360 acres. It has pictures and descriptions of his horse barn and I thought it fit very well with the descriptions in the Wolfe book. Here is the URL:

The Farm

In addition to this farm, he is selling his home for another $2 million.

Larry

Yvonne T. Skole

April 12, 1999 - 06:40 pm

Thank you Larry for the "farm" info--the graphics are better than any of TW's real estate language--oh, and my daughter's stable is not quite like this--Yvonne

patwest

April 12, 1999 - 08:16 pm

Nor my daughter's horse barn.

Ginny

April 13, 1999 - 04:46 am

Question for us all: For some reason it took a little while today for the heading to open for me. I'd like to know if you find the heading slows your progress in here down at all? I know some of you hate headings and some love them and want the information, so I'm asking, off the top of my head, how you feel about the one here?

Larry, thanks for putting the Kenny Rogers "farm" in, I remember seeing interviews with him on it, it looked like paradise then, and now....with the marble foyer in the horse barn (even Biltmore didn't have marble foyers in the horse barn) and the 12 bathrooms, 3 half baths and 10 bedrooms it looks like Tom Wolfe missed an important segment of society to lampoon: the celebrity with no brains. I wonder what happened to Marianne, Kenny's wife of that marriage (before his phone sex scandal that ended that marriage). She had been an actress on Hee Haw prior to becoming Mrs. Rogers. Wolfe really had a fertile ground there for satire, sardonic wit, irony, and general credibility issues.

Am extremely disgusted in this last section which we take up Sunday with Martha, but will hold off.

Ginny

CharlieW

April 13, 1999 - 06:39 pm

"Each of us considers what is in keeping with his character…" - Quoting from Epictetus (Ch XVII p. 411). I think that TW believes this and that, each 'character' in the book acts and reacts in a certain way - in keeping with their character, some might say 'type'. Act in ways that they must. Certainly Charlie, Zale. Peepgas. Mayor Jordan. Conrad is written, I believe, as a character that acts in allegiance to a deep sense of self, an odd by-product of his parentage. He is written, I believe, as someone who is discovering his true self, as someone who has acted in certain ways without self-awareness - as someone who is just now discovering that self awareness. Ginny: "in fact I'm now wondering why Roger Too White messed up so badly" - well TW might make a case that RTW had lost the ability to consider what was in keeping "with his character". An ability he discovers in the end.

"testicular squall" (Ch. XVII, pg. 418) - that's VERY good! Amidst the squall at the end of CH XVII, Conrad ponders his decisions and searches for his character.

Charlie

CharlieW

April 13, 1999 - 07:19 pm

Martha interests me because she has a certain self-awareness that most characters in the book lack. As the invisible and superfluous woman, she sees her only way 'back' may be through/with Peepgas. Ironically, in that relationship, and she sees this clearly, it will be Peepgas who is the appendage and she will be the 'active' member of the couple. Peepgas, the invisible man, will achieve some measure of credibility, through Martha. A bit of a delicious twist.

A feeling I sensed throughout the novel is of TW flitting about between characters, now speaking through Charlie, then again speaking through Conrad. Ch. XVIII, pgs. 434-436. As Charlie listens to the new Museum Director - doesn't he listen with TW's ear?

CharlieW

April 13, 1999 - 07:53 pm

We get high Biblical Drama in Chapters 19-20, don't we? After Conrad's 'trial' by Zeus (at the hands of Rotto - which he passes), he is delivered like Daniel from the Lion's Den from his personal Den of Iniquity, by an earthquake. Certainly far-fetched. But hey - it happens all the time in parables and the Bible. Jim mentioned starting The Poisonwood Bible and having your Bible handy. And guess what? (I love it when this happens!!) At a certain point Brother Price and Brother Fowles are having a good ole fashioned Bible quotin' duel and there it is - Acts, Chapter 16…

"And when they had laid many stripes upon them, they cast them into prison, 
 charging the jailor to keep them safely:  
Who, having received such a charge, thrust them into the inner prison, 
 and made their feet fast in the stocks.  
And at midnight Paul and Silas prayed, and sang praises unto God: 
 and the prisoners heard them.  
And suddenly there was a great earthquake, 
 so that the foundations of the prison were shaken: 
 and immediately all the doors were opened, and every one's bands were loosed.

Arnold Grey

April 14, 1999 - 04:45 am

Charles has pin pointed the chapter and verse I was searching for.

I guess if the God of the old testament can use an earthquake to help out his followers Zeus can do the same for Conrad without overstretching our credulity too much.

But I don't agree with Charles that Wolfe sees Conrad as someone now just discovering his true self.

I think that the entire Stoic episode is part of the satire with something like the cult like followers of Ayn Rand in mind- an excessive individualism characteristic of the 80's. Better that Conrad return to his hippie roots which deveoped a sense of social concern (unfortunately without a needed sense of reponsibility or discipline) than to Epictitus.

But then I'm letting my personal philosophy intrude here.

Ginny,

The reference to the Garden was in response to a posting you made about whether Eve should have left the garden or not.

Jim,

Yes that was my attempt at an allusion to Milton.

Wasn't it in Paradise Lost that Adam and Eve "westward wend their weary way" after being expelled from Paradise?

And the rest is history.

I'll be in travelling through Wisconsin in June on my way up to the UP where we have a cottage in the Ottawa National Forest. Sipping some cherry wine in Door County sounds good to me sitting on the veranda- maybe Sister Bay? We could sit there and observe BB's or maybe even

CharlieW

April 14, 1999 - 07:26 pm

Earlier, Ginny quoted TW talking about the Internet. He has his fun at the SuperHighways expense in Chapter 21 when the 'news' of the Fanon rape is first reported on the 'net.' With The Drudge Report in mind, TW perceptively points out (through Mayor Jordan) how this type of unattributed news reporting puts great pressure on the conventional media to publish what they already had but are unable to because of their journalistic ethos. The web site is called Chasing the Dragon. Jordan tells RTW that that refers to a "new way of taking heroin." Correct:"The most common form of heroin smoking in the Netherlands is called 'chinezen' by users, which means chinesing and reveals its Eastern origins. In English speaking countries, this form of heroin smoking is called 'chasing the dragon' or shortly chasing." ...from a report on heroin smoking in the Netherlands

CharlieW

April 14, 1999 - 08:09 pm

In Chapter 21 when Peepgass goes to 'The Real Buckhead" to meet with Martha, I thought it interesting how TW kind of changed pace with his style and began using a kind of interior dialogue interspersed with their conversation - sort of a he said/he thought/she said/she thought style. Interesting - but I got the feeling that TW was kind of trying it out just to see how it felt. It doesn't feel right. On the other hand, this is just the start of a kind of tentative pas de deux they engage in through Chapter 23. So it does make sense in a certain way. They're like two fighters feeling each other out in the early rounds, vying for position. And position is exactly what Peepgas is about: "In an era like this one, the twentieth century's fin de siecle, position was everything, and it was the hardest thing to get. Once you had position…there were innumerable places to go for…life's merely carnal delights."

Ginny

April 15, 1999 - 02:55 am

Charlie, I'm so glad you're back!! Chasing the dragon, indeed, am glad to know that's factual!

Arnold and Jim: Ok, I'm jealous now, you all will have to promise to talk books as you sit there in the gloaming!!

Oh I'm very disappointed with Martha but will hold off until Sunday, WHY AM I NOTHING WITHOUT A MAN SYNDROME, even such a "man" as Peepgas.

Charlie, maybe some of the irritation I feel is from the sudden switch in style, he said/ he thought/ she said/ she thought/ and I agree, it's maddening. I don't like it.

Woke up this morning thinking, is that what really happens every time you meet somebody? Are you looking them over and noting the weight of shoulders which she tries to conceal? Ugg ugg. I know people who quit over the "boys with breasts" stuff but it's this little bit in Chapter XXI which has me in disgust.

So Martha, the Intelligent, the Introspective, NEEDS A MAN so she won't be invisible and he can bring that to her and she can bring position? So really the entire book is totally full of disappointing characters.

I haven't been in her position but I sure have seen it, and I can't speak to the issue but PEEPGAS?? Just because she's 53? I reject that.

Ginny

Helen

April 15, 1999 - 12:51 pm

"[The Internet is] the greatest time-waster of all time. We don't need another time-waster in America. I don't believe the Internet is going to change human nature in the slightest."

Tom Wolfe, Author, Quoted in Business 2.0, February 1999, requoted in PC Computing May 1999 issue.

Ginny:

I would think the above is the explanation for the fact that TW did not even bother to respond with a form letter to the letter sent him requesting him to answer questions from our book club members. The man "didn't want to waste his time". I couldn't disagree with him more, I think the interent is pure magic!

Larry: Thanks so much for the farm link. I enjoyed seeing how the really wealthy live...not too shabby.

Charlie:

Did some searching re: Chasing the Dragon and there's lots out there.

Back later to post some links. There's even a Tv Movie by that title.

Maida

April 15, 1999 - 01:09 pm

Ginny, I agree with you about TW's treatment of Martha and also reject the idea that she is THAT desperate at 53. I find it hard to swallow that she would settle for a Casper Milktoast existence with Peepgas - it's not realistic.

Eileen Megan

April 15, 1999 - 01:32 pm

Maida and Ginny, thoughts on Martha. It doesn't surprise me that Martha, whose self esteem is in the hopper after being dumped, resorted to "any man would do", hey, it happens. For me the question would be, is it likely that in the social circles she formerly traveled in as CC's wife, would she now be treated as invisible? Is this TW's take or is it all too true?

Eileen Megan

Maida

April 15, 1999 - 01:41 pm

EILEEN,

I have often found that women friends who are widowed or divorced in middle age do feel rejected. I don't think that society is particularly kind to women in their 50's and 60's - and it's especially true for those women who never had a career or who never cultivated other close women friends. Don't you think that today's woman has a choice when she finds herself adrift without a MAN? Some settle for just anyone to fill the void but others see the sudden freedom as a gift - and go on to use it very well. If Martha's biggest problem is whether or not to buy a $20,000 table then she hasn't learned much along the way - what the heck is she doing to make herself less invisible? I am NOT liking TW's vision of womanhood at all - it's smug, unflattering and chauvinistic.

Ginny

April 15, 1999 - 05:08 pm

I have to say this, not to mention the HAIR references, are you all getting those? Helmets, pineapple blonde, carapaces?? Don't any women BUT Serena have normal hair and what's with Buck McNutter's (oh please...please...please that name) wife LEERING at the men so they ALL drop their attitudes?

Oh my.

Back with more tomorrow!

Loved the Bibical reference to the earthquake, Charlie!

Ginny

CharlieW

April 15, 1999 - 06:56 pm

(Ginny - you want another "hair" reference? See below)

Where did we first meet Martha? Chapter 9 - Superfluous Woman? Grunting and sweating, flapping her arms like a zee-gull at DefinitionAmerica, relegated to a painted box on the floor as her space, between two Rake-a-cheek boys with breasts and hurricane manes. My first reaction was that she was pathetic and spunky at the same time. At least she was doing something! Misdirected, perhaps, but she had at least decided on a course of action. Fifty-three and she needed a man. Well that just isn't RIGHT. But I can't bring myself to say that she was wrong to feel this way. TW feels, and I can't argue for the most part, that THIS IS THE WAY IT IS. Martha is a realist in a surreal world. While she may have been a prime mover in Charlie's success, in the scheme of things she was expendable, and being expendable she became invisible - superfluous. If you start off from a certain position with a certain goal in mind, relying on symbols and status, that's all you're left with. And that can be easily taken away in this society. Stripped of everything you ever wanted, you're left with nothing but yourself, and that self has always been defined through associations. Well - in late middle age that can be fairly daunting, I'd guess. More than a rebuilding process, one is faced with the molding of one's own character that has never been 'built' in the first place. If one has abandoned one's own aspirations (Martha was a medical student) and put all of your energies into the "other" (Charlie's)…well then. Sure - she got what she deserved - if anyone deserves that. One may very easily look for shortcuts. Peepgass may be such a shortcut. One may be angry. One may be disappointed with the choice. But I find that I can't bring myself to point my finger at her…Faced with the choice of becoming an independent woman at this stage in her life, revisiting choices she made as a young woman has to be extremely difficult. It's easier to get back to where she was - or as close as possible, by the shortest route available. A little wiser this time. The roles reversed somewhat. More aware of her place, his place. She’ll take advantage of HIS weaknesses this time. She'll be in control. She'll take what she can get. Somewhat wiser, calculating. A Realist. One gets the feeling that she'll at least make sure that 'it' never happens again.

Now I DON'T think it's unrealistic, in this context that she'd take this course of action. I admit, however, that I'm NOT satisfied with her choice of vehicle (Peepgass). It's completely feasible to me that Peepgass would hook up with Martha, but the reverse I DO have trouble with. Unless……unless it's that he is of just the right malleability. Perhaps.

I just don't KNOW what TW's idea of womanhood in 20th Century America is. I'm going to say he just hasn't drawn it for me. Maybe he hasn't the ability. I'm not prepared to make the leap that it's Martha Crocker. Actually, in this same Chapter (9), her friend, Joyce Newman gives her some pretty sound advice (not necessarily the part about buying a table for 20 Grand). Advice which she doesn't take, because it's the hard road. Joyce is someone to admire - but of course she's only a minor character.

Jim Olson

April 16, 1999 - 06:43 am

re Martha and Peepgas

Whatever we may think of that pair and how they got together- they do need each other and find that out.

Martha learns that she can no longer function in Atlanta society without a husband and a home base.

Peepgas finds that Martha's connections with that society opens doors for him.

Martha also finds out that the one thing she could continue to depend on Charley for; the $50,000 a month is not secure.

voila- the new match based on mutual need and no illusion about its basis on either side.

Probably a more solid and lasting connection than the Serena/Charley one.

The very fact that Peepgas is more timid about risk and less flaybouant a speculator than Charley probably insures a steady income. He is shrewd enough in the banking world.

He would not be the one to pledge his own personal assets on a loan as Charley foolishy (in the ethos of the corporate world of greed) does in the hopes of grandiose ego and financial reward.

Peepgas is a safer bet.

If Martha is selling her soul as some of us fear she is at least getting a pretty good price in terms of what is available to her.

A better deal than Serena got for selling hers.

Wolfe is not writing a novel with a happy ending about virtue rewarded and the endurance of undying love- he is showing us the foibles of our society and Martha partakes of them as do most of us to some degree or other ever since our ancesotral Adam and Eve tasted that darn apple.

The serpent whispers to us as well- and Wolfe lets us know about it.

It's just that he doesn't do it as skillfully as he might with a better written last half of the book in spite of Arnold's contrary view about that.

Yvonne T. Skole

April 16, 1999 - 08:44 am

It seems TW has a good reporter's curiosity about some things which with personal explorations he can describe quite vividly creating for the reader the tension and insight to learn more about an experience "outside" themselves. But his talent in this regard doesn't have the scope to present a novel such as he tried with MinF--why not do what he does best rather than labor 10 years to bring forth a gnat?Yvonne

SarahT

April 16, 1999 - 09:30 am

Jim - Peepgas can barely make ends meet - I don't see that he offers Martha the security she seeks. And she's a fairly discerning woman so I don't think she'd be fooled by his middle-manager mediocrity into believing he's actually well off.

Charles and Jim - I can relate to the idea that women - at various ages - seek out a man just to give them legitimacy in the world. It's an ugly truth and affects women at 33 and 43 just as much as it does at 53. Peepgas must have had some ability to attract women - he had an ex-wife and an ex-mistress, after all. It still wasn't plausible that she'd choose him, however.

Speaking of "Chasing the Dragon," did anyone see the HBO special on black tar heroin use here in San Francisco. It was horrifying.

CharlieW

April 16, 1999 - 07:26 pm

It is said that women are attracted to a man with power, influence. Henry Kissinger is said to be attractive. (I always found him to be the very ugliest face of Machiavellian evil - but that's just me!) Do the women here agree that Henry the K is a desirable man? Martha is still sizing up Peepgass when in Chapter 23 (The Deal), Ray begins his attempt to interest Martha in his syndicate idea. Immediately "she….liked him more this way. He now seemed…more of a man. He was no Charlie, but he had Charlie's passion for the deal, which was perhaps where the contemporary male's passion for battle went these days. This idea seems to be a standard one. Is it true?? By the way, I've got a problem with that sentence. To me,TW lurches from Martha's voice to his own in mid-sentence here. It's just not credible that Martha would (inner) voice this idea (the subsumed passion for battle) while listening to Peepgas. Her interest is now truly piqued. She has convinced herself that Peepgass can be an acceptable vehicle for her return to Atlanta society, for her to regain her visibility.

SarahT

April 16, 1999 - 08:17 pm

Henry the K does nothing for me!

Ginny

April 17, 1999 - 06:46 am

Me, either. Can't wait till tomorrow to launch into our last week of this discussion! So much to say, I found a curious parallel in the writing, want to see what you all think.

I agree that Power is a strong attractant to women, tho. In a poll when asked about the most important thing women look for in a man, "humor" is always at the top of the list. Yet I believe that "power" itself is also very attractive, especially in a society which is based on capitalism, in that power and money represent "success."

And in the wild, the survival of the fittest depends upon aligning with the "leader of the pack."

I can't imagine finding Henry Kissenger attractive on any front at all.

Back later, your posts were marvelous, and I just want to say thank you to each and every one of you who contributed to what I think is a triumphant discussion, our first one with no discussion leader, and a great time had by all. I have certainly enjoyed it, and look forward to our last week starting tomorrow: the only thing which would have put the icing on the cake would have been an appearance by TW the Man himself, but, as Helen noted, maybe not this time.

Ginny

Jim Olson

April 17, 1999 - 10:53 am

Sarah,

You make a good point:

Jim - Peepgas can barely make ends meet - I don't see that he offers Martha the security she seeks. And she's a fairly discerning woman so I don't think she'd be fooled by his middle-manager mediocrity into believing he's actually well off.

But as a team they might do quite well.

On the other hand, Wolfe is pointing out the ethos of the corporate world of greed where barely meeting ends meet on a personal level is not all that relevant. In fact may not be relevant at all.

Charley's accountant has it all down Pat- One never risks one's own money.

Charley spends money like mad- but mostly it is OPM (other people's money)

I no longer have the book so I don't have the figures but Charley is way beyond "making ends meet"- he is in the red- red- red.

I know people like Charley. They live in mansions, drive big cars, have private planes, and never make ends meet. They live out their business days in the red- but have lots of OPM to spend.

If they listen well to their accountants and laywers and have the right connections they get by with this quite well.

This is a world Peepgas knows and can stumble along in with the help of Martha's connections

Ed Zivitz

April 17, 1999 - 01:35 pm

Hi: I recommend for your reading a column in the Wall Street Journal on Friday, April 16,1999. The column is by J.Bottum and is titled: Wolfe vs. Woolf... the prizes are in. A Man In Full came up empty. Why?

The column itself would make for an interesting discussion and there is a bit of mention about The Poisonwood Bible.This might also shed some light on what one observer said about "chick Books".

Ginny

April 18, 1999 - 06:16 am

WELL!! Here we are beginning our last week on MIF and taking a hard look at the book overall and seeing if the tying of the ends justified the 700 page means.

In this section Conrad meets Charlie, Charlie goes to the Press Conference, Charlie becomes an Evangelist, Roger contemplates a political career, Peepgas sits in Charlie's old chair, and the reader spins a hole in the ground.

First off, Ed, thanks for that notice, it IS a good article and points out that the writing in Poisonwood Bible is superior to that of MIF and that the Hours which won is about NOTHING but beautifully written? Very provocative article.

Wofle is quoted as saying no writers today are attempting to chronicle life as we know it.

OK.

On Peepgas: What's wrong with this picture? Martha is invisible and Peepgas will make her visible, even after Charlie's money is gone?

So what happens to that big house and servants? Peepgas RENTS a Volvo for Pete's sake. Peepgas is a "meet, slight, unmeritable man, meant to be sent on errands." He does NOT elevate her status with her former friends, Lomprey (not name again, o ye who keep notes) the Lamprey doesn't even SEE him.

No, no. This would not work. She was attracted to Charlie. How could she sit by and let Wallace see Peepgas's remarks on Charlie on the tv? No. This is TW's idea of what a 53 year old woman with hefty shoulders (while decrying boys with breasts) wants, and it's not realistic. House would go. Servants would go. Money would drain from the original settlement... Society would not make her visible, she was just a curiosity with Peepgas. Nothing more.

The Roger Too White turning Black stuff is the only heavy handed irony I see in the book, and is sorry indeed. So Roger says one thing and is astounded when the Black community says "Gotcha back," the whole thing is totally inexplicable. Is Wolfe saying that Black people are not reasonable? This makes no sense. And it also makes no sense to end the book with Roger, as HE was not the main character.

Or was he?

Likewise the Zeus thing is stupid. Zeus was the supreme god of the Greeks and Romans and so would correspond to the supreme God we have today, for Pete's sake. A supreme god is a supreme God and to go around talking about Zeus and The Manager in 1999 is to totally miss the point Epictetus was making. Maybe TW is afraid of the word God. I don't know.

Charlies scene of enlightenment at the press conference was marred by his rambling on and on, he's SUCH an old man, isn't he? OLD OLD OLD, OLD!! 60 years OLD!! An ancient who can be forgiven for losing his marbles, an old fogey. Good thing he found the WAY before he died.

I can't understand this point of view at all.

This is an interesting quote from page 722: "you think if only you can acquire enough worldly goods, enough recognition, enough eminence, you will be free, there'll be nothing more to worry about, and instead you become a bigger and bigger slave to how you thnk others are judging you."

I found that intersting, what do we think money will do for us, anyway? Is the author of this statement correct?

Ginny

Maida

April 18, 1999 - 06:28 am

GINNY, Interesting post, your most recent. I couldn't agree more with your views on Martha. What we think that money can do for us might warrant an entirely new folder! I've had it all, lost some of it and now care only about being comfortable, safe and able to indulge my many interests. For me money is now merely a convenience - the chasing of it a bore. I feel that the end of this book was a disappointment; it seemed to all fall apart just barely missing being totally ridiculous - which may, after all, what TW intended. What a giant put on!

Eileen Megan

April 18, 1999 - 08:37 am

I don't have the book anymore so can't remember exactly what happened to everyone. There have been many comments on how disappointed readers were in the ending. Any ideas on what would be a more satisfying ending? Should it have ended with a bang instead of a whimper? As trite as it was, I actually was relieved when poor Conrad seemed to come out all right in the end.

Eileen Megan

Larry Hanna

April 18, 1999 - 08:39 am

Just a quick followup on Freaknik here in Altanta. This is the weekend and from all indications Freaknik has not amounted to much. According to the Atlanta Journal-Constitutuion this morning:

Reports of Freaknik's imminent demise may not have been exaggerated. Faced with overwhelming police presence, a zero tolerance policy for lewd and disruptive behavior in downtown Atlanta, and competing events last weekend in Daytona Beach, Fla., and this weekend in Galveston, Texas, young black college students avoid this city in droves." More Freaknik Information

Larry

SarahT

April 18, 1999 - 12:13 pm

Jim - I completely agree with you that people who handle other people's money often cannot handle their own. (It's a variant of the old saying "the lawyer who represents himself has a fool for a client.) But I still think Martha was too bright - and too experienced in the ways of the world - to fall for a phony like Peepgas.

I tend to agree with Ginny on this that TW underestimates Martha (and women of her ilk) by pairing her with Peepgas.

The ending was AWFUL! AWFUL! So trite, with all the loose ends wrapped up in a brief chat in the Mayor's office was it? I hated it! It felt as if Wolfe lost interest in the book by that point, and just threw something together to END it. He probably felt that if he didn't end it, he would continue with it for another ten years. He couldn't think of a brilliant way to wrap things up, so he settled for something - anything - to get away from it.

Ginny, the quote about money is SO true. One of our daily papers just ran a series about "middle class" people here in the Bay Area who get caught up in buying homes, and more than one car and all sorts of other expensive things just for outward appearances. This keeping up with the Joneses hides the reality that they're bankrupt (or nearing it), stressed out and miserable. Years ago I worked in a big law firm where people made huge amounts of money. However, when I figured out that the partners were spending everything they earned on bigger and bigger houses and cars and toys, I realized that the truth was precisely as TW recited it.

I'm with you, Maida!

SarahT

April 18, 1999 - 12:14 pm

And thanks Larry for the Freaknik(c?) information. Didn't the students move the event to a beach area?

Jim Olson

April 19, 1999 - 04:29 am

Wolfe- Woolf

Yes I agree that Poisonwood Bible is much more poetically written than Man in Full.

And it does deal with social issues and does in many subtle ways the kind of satire that Wolfe attempts with heavy handed sometimes even Mad Magazine means.

But I don't think the two are really competitive. They are complementary in a way.

Poisonwood is feminine and Man is masculine.

They both look at human foibles- but from different points of view- both points of view valuable in their own way.

Posionwood ends with a beautiful poetic spiritual universal whisper-

Wolfe bangs away at us for pages and then Man ends with a whimper- another poetic ending- but a different poet.

Wolfe vs Woolf

Eliot vs Dickinson

I very much enjoyed both of

May Naab

April 19, 1999 - 07:04 am

Well said, Jim!! I have read both of them also. I am glad I read MIF. Actually, I kept reading because of all of your excellent comments. It did get a little draggy at times. Poisonwood Bible will stay with me forever. It certainly is BK`s best--

Arnold Grey

April 19, 1999 - 11:52 am

Hey Jim,

Now you've got it.

There is a little of the "Wasteland" in Man in Full- Starts with a spring break a freaknic- "breeding desire etc."

There is a little of "Dover Beach" too in its pessimistic view of us.

A Little of Jonathan Swift as well.

I see you read Eliot and Emily Dickinson- interesting combination.

Wolfe does very well what he does and it isn't the same thing that Barbara Kingsolver does.

She starts Poisonwood with a fleeting moment of the mother's self awareness and unity with the antelope- then takes every character through a series of wrenching but beautifully done alienations from the land they live in and each other, using their own words to do it.

Finally she brings it all back together- back to the antelope image- to a universal reconciliation. Even the father finally blends into the jungle- eevn though it's ala Joesph Conrad and Heart of Darkness.

Wolfe doesn't want to leave us with that same feeling. That is not what he is up to. You are right on. He doesn't have that soft feminine touch that tries to heal even where healing may be illusory.

Wolfe sees through a glass darkly and healing is not there- only the stark disease.

It's good think the group is reading Poisonwood after Man.

Wolfe uses his own techniques and in his own way does what he does just as well as Kingsolver does what she does.

I think many people object to the novel not becasue it is poorly written but because it is so well-written that we can't deny it and are forced to cricize Wolfe not for how well he does it but for what he does.

And to his eye peering at us from the cover, that is to show us as we are.

We can loudly proclaim to him "No, that is not as we are," but we can't deny that he presents us with a picture we are forced to view.

I wouldn't presume to change the ending. It's Wolfe's ending and any change we might make would make it into something else.

And so I'll Leave Wolfe and leave Kingsolver and return some day to another time- another book.

Maybe there will be one somewhere down the line that combines the best of both.

CharlieW

April 19, 1999 - 12:44 pm

Booknotes on C-Cpan will have author Randall Kenan on 4/25 talking about his book

Walking on Water: Black American Lives at the Turn of the Twenty-First Century . Kenan conducted over 200 interviews with African Americans all across the country over a six year period, including with "Atlanta's new Panther-style militants". May be interesting to watch after having spent time with Roger Too White's dilemma.

Randall Kenan On Booknotes

CharlieW

April 20, 1999 - 05:33 pm

Summation and Conclusion. Summation and Conclusion. Well. I'm assiduously avoiding that task. How to pull it all together? Hmm. Maybe if I drag my feet, something will come to me…Maybe an AHA! moment will smack me upside! An earthquake perhaps, will shake everything up and when the dust settles, all will be clear. All far-flung elements will now be lined up in a perfectly coherent and logical solution. Well Deux my Machina - Maybe I can borrow some of that authorial prerogative and say: "Hey! I just tell it like it is. It's not for ME to provide a solution here. It may be YOUR world but it's MY mirror!" HA! Well it's bound to sort itself out. It always does. If I wait long enough…..So Tom Wolfe is much on my mind these days. But this is ridiculous. I'm reading the paper. And ALL THIS ON ONE PAGE!!! Here's an article about Jerry Browm (My Man). I love Jerry. Really do. Conrad Hensley leaves Atlanta after stewarding Charlie Croker. Returns to the Bay area, and Voila! Mayor of Oakland. "What begins, ends, and what ends comes back in another form" says Jerry. On Pothole Power, Jerry says: "There's something about a pothole. It's immediate, it's real, and you can fix it for very little." This story may not be over yet!

And on the very same page. Too White has indeed entered politics. An article about 22 year Georgia House of Representatives member John (I wanna say TOO) White. Seems John White, in a bid for a State Senate seat was outspent 17-1 by then incumbent Mark Taylor, who used $90k of his own funds ($270k more) vs. a total of $16k from "friends, black social clubs and a few white supporters." A lawsuit contends that "Georgia sanctions and exacerbates the exclusionary operation of wealth in state elections." If life imitates art, what do we say about Wolfe? Art chronicles life which imitates art which chronicles life which…. it's like that man on the Quaker Oats Box.

Of course that even the very smallness of a Peepgas can be seen as elevating, in the eyes of society, a single woman in late middle age is outrageous. But is it not sad but true? The thing is, I don't think that Martha was FOR A MINUTE fooled by Peepgas. I think she settled for the quick fix. The easy way out-back in. I think it's clear she's making a mistake. I think TW IS stretching credulity here but can't resist the delicious irony of the Mouse replacing the Giant.SarahT - interesting comment about the ending. One could probably make the case for TW as a compulsive chronicler with a terrifically keen eye. One can imagine new observations coming to him daily that he JUST HAS to get in, then more, THEN MORE! Where does it end? Stop……and start again.??One wants to say

HURRY UP PLEASE ITS TIME

Let me bring up, once again the 3/4 profile of Charlie Croker staring through the 'O' of Tom. His one eye blackened. The back flap has TW in the same profile. I do believe TW sees himself as a Titan in his own field much as Charlie was in his. But "they" just won't give him his due. A background thing. Wolfe forever the journalist in the eyes of the academics. In his own mind, the one true heir to Dickens. Charlie, forever the good ole' boy builder, caught a lucky break through marriage…well, class will seek it's level

Jim Olson

April 21, 1999 - 07:16 am

Charles,

Your analogy of Wolfe and Dickens was interesting.

Some of Wolfe's earlier short stories have a touch of sentimentality in them ala Dickens, and Dickens in Oliver Twist has a chapter where Bill is chased across the rooftops in London that is surreal in style and I thought of it when I read the prison escape scene. In terms of style that is.

But Dickens would have dashed Man off in six months and not written and researched it meticulously over a period of years.

I didn't see any sentimentality in Man.

Helen

April 21, 1999 - 07:34 am

In summing up…

When TW was asked how much of the book was reporting and how much came out of his imagination he responded as follows:

TOM WOLFE: Just about everything was from reporting, because it's about things I knew nothing about when I started. I mean, I knew nothing about quail plantations in Southwest Georgia, for example. I knew nothing about county jails in California and the life inside of them. I knew nothing about Atlanta politics and racial politics until I went out and did some reporting on it. To me, reporting is absolutely essential to the novel now more than it ever was.

Okay so as for the above I feel right on track with him. Those were the parts of the book I found fascinating reading. I along with TW and I guess most of us knew nothing or little of the places he took us to.

I found the major characters in the book to be one dimensional and unbelieveable.

But most vexing aspect for me is that I while many of the the critics as well as some of you,called the novel "hilarious" and "rollicking in parts"…I never found it so, "enthralling"… yes! However, I found the many contemporary issues to be those that have and continue to redefine and reshape our society in ways that alarm me. Now I know that this is written as satire, so I present the following:

1 : a literary work holding up human vices and follies to ridicule or scorn 2 : trenchant wit, irony, or sarcasm used to expose and discredit vice or folly synonym see WIT

Okay so there you have it. I still don't get it. What am I missing???????

Ginny

April 21, 1999 - 07:50 am

Maida, I sort of think of money as insulation, have always thought if you managed to get enough of it you could, somehow, insulate yourself from the harshness of life, or the little irritations, anyway.

But Epictetus, apparently, says no. That you just want more and you also want the acclaim of others.

Sarah saw that in her law office, but remember, Charlie never did prize it all that much, or said he didn't anyway. Somewhere in all that conspicuous consumption for show he revealed that it didn't mean much, I thought it incongruous at the time.

I've just finished a parallel to the book in Dominick Dunne's People Like Us which starts out with old money going down the drain, new money and a second wife conspicuously spending and going down the drain, a character from the other side of life: a homosexual prostitute with a heart of gold who shows the bad guys the way, and a prison scene. Sound familiar??

It's now back in print because the newest Dunne, Another City, Not My Own about the OJ Simson murders, has the same character, a thinly veiled embellishment of Dunne himself.

I love everybod's take on the end. Maida said DID TW intend it as a put on? The only thing I can think is that he realized it wasn't his best and so gave the characters those names as armor: to say, well, see I intended this as a hoot from the beginning!! Didn't work, tho. Heck no, I don't see how anyhbody could spend ten years of their life writing a put on deliberately?

Megan: a better ending?? That's quite a question!! I believe I would have liked to see Charlie get out of it. I don't think he's that naive; no Swiss or Bermuda bank accounts?? Of course, the nature of that business IS that a lot can go down in a flash; I believe if Charlie DID get up to give a speech, he should not have rambled.

Conrad should have gone back to school, majored in Philosophy. Martha should have thrown Peepgas out by the scruff of his sorry neck: two children he never saw from one marriage and one from the next. Woiuld like to see Lomprey give HIM the boot, maybe ol Zale do a workout on HIM.

Larry, I've been wondering about that Freaknik in Daytona, but have heard nothing, but I bet Atlanta is glad!

Funny how the news comes more alive when you read a lot.

Jim and Arnold, I hadn't made the connection with "The Wasteland," neato. Thanks, Guys. At least People Like Us ended with a bang, literally.

Charlie, what a HOOT! The newspaper and MIF!! I especially liked your "I do believe TW sees himself as a Titan in his own field much as Charlie was in his. But "they" just won't give him his due. A background thing. Wolfe forever the journalist in the eyes of the academics. In his own mind, the one true heir to Dickens."

I think you are totally right on, that's exactly the feeling I got and don't know why. hahahahaha

Greg Changnon, writing in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution poses two questions I thought were fabulous and I am not sure I know the answers to one of them. (He gave the ansewer to the second one). What do you think??

1. Who is Wolfe's "man in full?" Is it the good-ole-boy Charlie Croker, the quiet schemer Ramymond Peepgas, or the modern-day Stoic Conrad Hensley? He left out Roger Too White, is it any of these? It's got to be ONE of them.

2. What is the central theme of A Man in Full ? (He does answer this one but don't look it up, what would YOU say?)

Ginny

Ginny

April 21, 1999 - 07:52 am

HELEN!! We were posting together, will read yours and come back this afternoon when I get a new keyboard, spilled a bottle of Diet Coke on my ergonomic one and can't type on this one AT ALL!! Took me an hour to post that above, will be back when I can once again type two letters,

Ginny

CharlieW

April 21, 1999 - 04:22 pm

I want to ask those who read Bonfire of the Vanities (Ed for one, I believe - anyone else?): Did TW do a better job of creating real characters, more fleshed out than he did in 'Bonfire'? I did not read it. Hadn't read Wolfe since the early seventies when his essays along with Joan Didion's said it all for me about who we were. To Wolfe, I'm afraid, we are what we eat, what we wear, what we drive, how much we make, how much we spend, how powerful we are, what influence we wield, to whom we are married, where we school ourselves, where we eat, how many people depend on us, etc., etc. This is the way he illustrates his characters. I reject this totally as a tool allowing him to accurately capture an individuals essence. The very idea that someone would attempt to provide an epitaph for ME using this approach offends me to the core. Bo Diddley knew the truth. Tom - you had a bookful of characters all trussed up with nowhere to go. So the ending is as plausible as anything we all can come up with. Why not? Were these characters so precisely drawn that only a certain conclusion was inevitable? Nope. Anything was possible, because we really didn't know these people. Now along the way you captured where the total "we" are at this point in time (at least the Atlanta variety), "fully" and without sentiment. Great job. You drew everyone, but no one. Perhaps Charlie and Conrad and Peepgas and Roger rolled in to one are a full picture of fin de siecle Atlanta Man. Ultimately, I guess I prefer to find my insights and inspirations in the soul of one carefully drawn, fully realized character than in the truth of sprawling composites. I prefer the stethoscope rather than the magnifying glass.

Maida

April 21, 1999 - 05:05 pm

I read Bonfires when it first appeared - found it to be as overdrawn as MIF and some of the characters just about as ridiculous. Not sure that one could compare Wolfe and Dickens across the board altho I want to explore some of the similarities.

Ginny

April 22, 1999 - 06:19 am

I read Bonfire,too, but got it hopelessly mixed up with one of Grisham's young man takes on establishment. Yet I remember being caught up in the beginning with the all too familiar scene of getting lost, I thought he did that very well.

Nobody is saying he can't write, I thought, frankly, I sensed the same type of writing in the opening scenes of Charlie and some of the invalid scenes, almost as if they had been written at the same time, sort of seemed the same.

I think Dickens chronicled a great deal of what he actually KNEW, didn't he? Altho he cloaked it in fiction, it exposed a lot that people didn't want to know about or didn't realize existed. His characters LIVED. Charlie lives for me, Peepgas doesn't and neither does Conrad, he's just too naive. (Says the "oldest living flower child" as my husband calls me).

Wolfe has made quite a point that it's all fictitious here, foks, not based on anyBODY at all, just fiction and thus it's hard to compare them, unless he protests too much. He's a good writer, but the book just didn't hang together.

What WAS, if we were looking at it in terms of plot, what WAS the climax of the book, do help?

Sarah did you get my letter or did I write the wrong Sarah??

Humor: no I didn't see anything amusing at all? Boy I must be lacking that awful little spot in the brain which affords humor, no, Helen, not laughing out loud. Sarcasm, to me, implies anger, is negtive, and thus it's hard to find it funny. As I write this, tho, there WAS one place where I sort of snorted, but can't remember it. Not a boffo book.

Now, Henderson the Rain King , yes.

Perhaps we all have different senses of humor.

I would say NONE of the characters are Men in Full, even Charlie with his new found philosophies, and that means we'd have to ask ourselves WHAT our definition of a MAN IN FULL is.

Will think on that one and return!

Ginny

Ginny

April 23, 1999 - 05:51 am

I have to say this, wasn't going to but Charlie mentioned epitaphs and have you seen the latest in tomstone technology? It's a video of the departed loved one, speaking to generations yet unborn. They say in the future all tombstones will be this way, and children who never knew the deceased will all be able to know him.

Interesting, no? May make the huge memorial obsolete.

Not that they aren't already.

Ginny

Helen

April 23, 1999 - 07:25 am

Ginny: I think people with video cameras have been making such memories possible for years now, without the specific intention of doing so. I do think it is not with out interest. Video technology makes the person and the event so very real..it might be better shown WELL after the departed has departed and the mourner is ready for it. I would think it depends on how close one was to the said departed.

As we are really just winding down I am sending along this section from an interview with Tw by Elizabeth Farnsworth:

From journalism to fiction. I'iI,IZABETtl FARNSWORTt t: You've always said that good reporting was crucial to writing a good novel, and here we are in a journalism school: it seems quite appropriate, ttow much of"A Man in Full" is reporting and how much just came out el'your imagination?

TOM W()IJ:E: .Ittst about everything was from reporting, because it's about things I knew nothing about when I started. I mean. I knew nothing about quail plantations ill Southwest Georgia. lbr example. 1 knew nothing about county jails ill Calilbnaia and the life inside oftllem. I knew nothing about Atlanta politics and racial politics until I went out and did some reporting on it. To me, reporting is absolutely essential to thc novel now more thaJl it ever was.

The novel is not going to be able to eompete with television, with movies, with other torres of stories )Jnles.% it exploils to the f,ull what only what only ptilal can do.

I!IJZABETtf F'AI~,NSWORTI I: Why?

T()M WOIJ:I{: It's because thc novel is not going to be able to compete with television, witIl movies, with other lbx'ms of stories tillless it exploits to tile full what only - what only print can do and what only - in this case - tile novel can do - and that is to bring people illside et'these amazing worlds that exist in tile [Jnited States today. I mean. this is an absolutely bizarre country but bizarre in a wondertiff way' if you happen to be a writer. And so many writers today are taught that the only valid material is their own lives and their only valid teelings are their own l~elings, and so they end up writing about their own lives. And once they've cannibalixed tileir own experience once. there's not much left tbr them to do: whereas, writers, if they were willing to write thc way Zola did or the way Dickens did, by being reporters, going out and tinding new material, they could open up this whole country.

While we discussed his passion for going out and reporting i thought it might be interesting to read his thinking on the same. I also was wondering if it was Tw who originally compared himeself to Dickens and and we see here also to Zola.

Helen

April 23, 1999 - 07:26 am

The process of being scanned and exported has done something to change the precision of the original printed word. Does that usually happen?

CharlieW

April 23, 1999 - 02:59 pm

I finally got ahold of the Wolfe vs. Woolf article that appeared in Friday's WSJ. My, my my Mr. Ba Ba Bottum!! Aren't WE towing the Tom Wolfe party line! So petulant today, aren't we! Using Norman Mailer's blast at Tommy Boy for "unprofessionalism" as his starting point, Mr. J. Bottum (real name, or is he just a character from a Tom Wolfe novel??) levels the lance of "professionalism" at Michael Cunningham and others no fewer than 8 times. It's always interesting to look at choice of words: precious (2), delicate (2), exquisite (5), dainty (1), gushed (1), scurried (1), tiny (1), and small (1). On the one hand we have authors described as "having a good cry" (Cunningham), as angels "dancing on the head on a pin" (Dillard), "ethereal doves" (Kingsolver), or lightweights (Munro, whose prose is apparently "so fine it can't lift anything heavier than a small cup of tea." Well, thank God we've got A MAN in Full like Tumescent Tom, fresh from the breeding barn, to show us life as it really is, bare-knuckled, lust-filled and without the frilly lace. Tom, with friends like these, you don't need enemies. Mr. J. Bottum is right about one thing though - TW DID bring this on himself with his attack on everyone else. Such hubris. What an anomaly though, Tom Wolfe in his White Linens scared to death of a race riot. This article sounded positively Nixonian. Pretty soon they won't have Tom Wolfe to kick around anymore. Well, let's all just settle down. This is just a little dust up between The Wall Street Journal and The New Yorker. As Up-Dikeian (or Woolfeian) as The New Yorker is, the WSJ is just as Woolfian. Dontcha just love a good New York Range War? Well I liked Kingsolver AND Tom Wolfe. So there! I even reserve the right to like Michael Cunningham if I so choose. I'm just SO inconsistent.

HELEN - Depending upon the OCR program you're using to convert your scan - it'll do funny things.

Jim Olson

April 23, 1999 - 05:16 pm

I haven't read the Wall Street Journal article but I would suspect that Wolfes "reporting" on the corporate world and its follies might have some effect on the objectivity of that source.

I don't see how Wolfe's white linens and hubris has anything to do with an assessment of his writing any more than Truman Capote's various eccentricities has to do with an evaluatiuon of his.

I no longer have the book and am not prepared to write a conclusion based on using chapter and verse to support my points.

I'll leave that to future literary historians as I do think Wolfe will rate a place in our Literary history for his blend of reporting, rolicking satire and serious social commentary; just as I feel Capote will for his achievement in developing a new literary form with In Cold Blood.

And so as Arnold has done, I will leave this discussion and await our discussion of Poisonwood.

SarahT

April 23, 1999 - 09:37 pm

Charles - that's the beauty of being real people, isn't it - we get to be inconsistent! I love it.

I feel much as Jim does - I finished the book long ago, felt it made no lasting impression on me, and am ready to get to Poisonwood. (Jim, actually you probably don't agree with me on the second point.)

I remember telling my husband as I started the book that it was "trash." I occasionally like to read a good book of trash - by which I mean a quick read without characters that move or surprise me and without a context that moves me in any way. In the end, I felt the same way about MIF. I won't buy it (I usually buy the books I really love - after I read them, since I'm a library user). I won't ever read it again. It hasn't stayed with me at all. I won't recommend it to my friends. But it was fun while I was reading it.

The best thing I got out of it was all of you! I found this site while reading MIF - I was looking for a place to talk about it. You all have been a joy to "talk" to, and I look forward to more of that on the next book, and the next.

Ginny, sorry to say I did not get your letter.

I only got an e-mail from you telling me SeniorNet was down.

Yvonne T. Skole

April 23, 1999 - 10:12 pm

Sarah--you're so right the best part about MIF has been all who have been discussing it here--and the many references and hyperlinks posted here. The book contained some exciting writing, but not much! But when I say I didn't think it worth recommending to others, I can be specific why.-Yvonne

Ginny

April 24, 1999 - 04:37 am

Yes, I, too, have enjoyed our discussion of this book tremendously and really want to thank everyone who contributed here, in our first discussion without a leader, I thought it went wonderfully well.

Even tho the discussion is over, the question of the central theme continues to haunt me. I would have said, if asked, that the major theme of the book was that material possessions are not what matters, and that each character sets about to prove that in so far as his or her own particular situation allows: even Roger Too White.

In that aspect, then, I'd have to say that the Man in Full would have to be Conrad, tho, let's face it, he didn't have too many of those posessions to start with. Maybe it's easier to get go of what you never had than to be like Charlie (tho Charlie never prized them that much, except for Turpmtine: hahahah my Georgia source pronounces it just that way, too).

I also do want to say I appreciate Wolfe's technique of dialect: he'll write it in English the first time and then put the sound of it in pareneheses, I do like that. That allows you to "hear" it while understanding it, which you wouldn't if you saw far fat originally. I do like that.

Am off until Sunday afternoon, have a great weekend!

Ginny

CharlieW

April 24, 1999 - 06:51 am

CONRAD'S ADVICE to CHARLIE (with apologies to The Bard) -

 
	Yet here, Charlie! aboard, aboard, for shame! 
	The wind sits in the shoulder of your sail, 
	And you are stay'd for. 
	Alas, a wrench doth lodge in yonder engine. 
	There; my blessing with thee! 
	And these few precepts in thy memory 
	See thou character. Give thy thoughts no tongue, 
	Nor any unproportioned thought his act. 
	(Ah, Herb Richman - I knew him well) 
	Be thou familiar, but by no means vulgar. 
	The Breeding Barn, a pleasure fond 
	Hast offended those who thou would seek. 
	Those friends thou hast, and their adoption tried, 
	Grapple them to thy soul with hoops of steel; 
	But do not dull thy palm with entertainment 
	Of each new-hatch'd, unfledged comrade. Beware 
	Of entrance to a quarrel, but being in, 
	Bear't that the opposed may beware of thee. 
	Give every man thy ear, but few thy voice; 
	Some things are better left unsaid. 
	Take each man's censure, but reserve thy judgment. 
	Costly thy habit as thy purse can buy, 
	But not express'd in fancy; rich, not gaudy; 
	For the apparel oft proclaims the man, 
	And they in Atlanta of the best rank and station 
	Are of a most select and generous chief in that. 
	A PlannersBanc borrower - do not be; 
	For loan oft loses both itself and friend, 
	And borrowing dulls the edge of husbandry. 
	Woe - Thou be to Serena as dull and spent 
	As last years cutlery. 
	This above all: to thine ownself be true, 
	And it must follow, as the night the day, 
	Thou canst not then be false to any man. 
	Farewell: my blessing season this in thee!

Ginny

April 26, 1999 - 04:27 pm

Charlie, I've forgotten the Shakespearian quotation, but it's something like "was there ever any one like him?" What a fabulous end to the discussion!! hahahahahah

LOVE it.

Ginny

Ginny

April 27, 1999 - 07:31 am

Friday's Wall Street Journal was full of bookish references: an article on Guterson's newest one which I think I'll pass on, and houses for sale in Alpharetta, Georgia, Buckhead, and Roswell. Only one was cheap at $495,000. The rest were way up there, I think the highest listed price was 2.2mil but some were not even listed price wise at all. They were all huge, like the ones in the heading, but one just stopped me in my tracks. My new computer doesn't have FTP on it, so I'm slow to upload, but this thing, imagine an English Manor House, all corners and fronts and just stretching for miles, then imagine on the right a turret or tower complex coming up out of a huge porte cochere. It's unbelievable. Now THAT'S the kind of conspicuous consumption that I think Wolfe was trying to expose. I wonder if Atlanta housing prices are a bit elevated? I realize these palaces are expensive, but some of the lesser ones seem to be in the half a mil range, too, and would not necessarily go for that other places. I guess it's neighborhood, my dear, neighborhood.

Ginny

SarahT

April 27, 1999 - 07:35 am

Half a mil gets you a simple two bedroom house in an ok neighborhood in this town! When my husband and I were out walking, we saw a house for sale along the way. It was a big house, with nice views, but ugly as sin. We started figuring how much it must be going for - I said half a mil, but Rob was sure it was over a mil because of its location. It's insane!

Maida

April 27, 1999 - 02:46 pm

Our state boasts a mere 18 miles of direct front ocean - the housing market this year is completely insane. Half a million buys one maybe three bedrooms on the ocean - slightly more half a mile away. Those of us who live here are disturbed by the number of once grand homes being torn down to be replaced by houses with absolutely no New England character. Having visited my share of these palaces I can atest to the amounts of granite, marble and the sheer number of mostly useless rooms - saw one library with NO BOOKS in it - lady of the house explained that the kids (now toddlers) may one day use it for doing homework. What do houses like this say about our culture - our value system?

Ginny

April 28, 1999 - 04:31 am

Sarah and Maida, isn't that something? And I guess if you want to LIVE in that area, and have more than two bedrooms you have to pay the price. Of course, ocean front land is not being made every day (or is, depending on your opinon of the reports of the inundation of our shores).

It's not like this (the building of huge homes) has not happened before, look at Newport, Long Island and look at Biltmore House in Asheville, NC. But in contrast to Maida's empty library in the house she saw, I think Biltmore House is an example of good conspicuous building: an exception, built BEFORE the Income Tax law, (as most of those grand palaces were) and way way off in the middle of nowhere. I admire that Vanderbilt: he was an ecologist and farmer, sort of a Renaissance man, and the family today is no slouch (Cecils: Vanderbilt only had one daughter, didn't live long) what a shame, but the father is trying to arrange it so it can be kept in the family after his death. One child oversees the vineyards and winery and business, another the grounds. I hope it can remain as he plans, in their hands after his death. The library is just now for the first time being catalogued, and it's my favorite place in the house. You can see Vanderbilt was a reader with a passion, the room is beyond words.

But those old huge beach houses: we had one in our family, too. In Morehead City in NC, a "cottage," I remember we used to spend the summers there with my aunt and uncle. People called it "Millionaire's Row," hahahah that wouldn't be much now, would it?

All I remember about it was it had 11 bathrooms, a cook, several upstairs maids, and a huge underground garage for all the cars. A nice porch and we played Canasta, and ate caramel cake. (I believe we can see the age WE were?) At any rate, the family squabbled and fell apart over it and sold it, and I don't want to go see what, if anything, is left of it.

So maybe the new thinking is that it's not clothes that make the man, it's houses! I used to get so sad looking at the huge piles for sale, trying to imagine the happy families there who had to give them up and how sad that was, but I've given that up, too, it's clear there are hundreds of them, and it well may be that some kind of rock star or sports money or worse has bought them, so it's not something to feel sad about, which is good.

Ginny

Eileen Megan

April 28, 1999 - 09:48 am

In Charlestown, MA, up near Bunker Hill Monument, there are brick row houses with maybe a postage stamp "yard" in the back - these are selling for ridiculous amounts of money. Across the street from my brother's house one of the "row" houses just sold for $425,000. If it's like my sister-in-law's mother's house, there are two rooms on each floor going up 4 stories.

Eileen Megan

Maida

April 28, 1999 - 02:49 pm

EILEEN,

How come Charlestown is now such a hip place to live? Todd English? I can remember when C. was right up there with Lynn as one of the last places one would ever want to live. The waterfront cleanup?

Eileen Megan

April 29, 1999 - 01:29 pm

Maida, I know, isn't that a riot? The other side of Charlestown still has the project so it's not all good. But up near the Monument it has turned into "yuppie" town. Jackie, my SIL, has lived there all her life so she's a real "townie". You wouldn't believe the Navy Yard today, it's beautiful - they have condos and marinas, very expensive. The Constitution has been refurbished, there is a museum there and what all. Some great restaurants too! A lovely park area. I don't know when you were in Charlestown last but they took down the elevated on Main St, nice homes, fancy gaslights all over the place. What a change!

Eileen Megan

Ginny

May 1, 1999 - 03:44 am

This discussion is now reluctantly concluded and we hope you'll all come over to our newest discussion, The Poisonwood Bible

And thank you for helping make this discussion one of our best, ever!

Ginny