My books - Their Eyes Were Watching God (1937) by Zora Neale Hurston

This is the second selection in my quest to read a couple Black History books this month.

Zora Neale Hurston was an African American writer.

Wiki wrote:
The novel narrates main character Janie Crawford's "ripening from a vibrant, but voiceless, teenage girl into a woman with her finger on the trigger of her own destiny". Set in central and southern Florida in the early 20th century, the novel was initially poorly received for its rejection of racial uplift literary prescriptions. Today, it has come to be regarded as a seminal work in both African-American literature and women's literature. Time included the novel in its 2005 list of the 100 best English-language novels published since 1923.

Here is the context section from Sparknotes on Their Eyes Were Watching God. Even if you have no interest in the book, you might consider reading this section as it is very unusual and interesting.

I also listened to a The Big Read discussion at the National Endowment for the Arts. I am always thrilled when one of the books I am reading pops up on their list. These commentaries are most excellent. (This was also available in CD form from my library.)

Here is a list of the contributors to this Big Read discussion. You will see some familiar names including Azar Nafisi who wrote Reading Lolita in Tehran.

These sources helped me to better appreciate Hurston's book. I am not saying the book was difficult. It was not. It was easy to understand. Those context resources just helped me to understand the history/placement of the book.

I read as if I am taking a literature class (most of the time).  It stimulates my intellect to read this way. I no longer read for avoidance. I no longer link reading and eating. This (intellectual viewpoint in reading) helps me to handle anything (upsetting) in the book. I can tell where the boundaries are between the story and me/mine. There was nothing upsetting in this (Their Eyes Were Watching God) book. I am just talking about reading in general. Yes, I still skip some books. I skipped Sophie's Choice in 2012. I had read that book long ago and it was the source of nightmares for me for many years (that and the Trail of Tears).  The latest (skip) was Unbroken. It came up on one of my lists. My husband saw me start to download CD's in the computer. He said - I don't think you want to read that. I asked my therapist (she had read it and her grandson was reading it right when I asked) and she said to skip it also. 

Here are things I thought about as I read Their Eyes Were Watching God:

A while back, I watched a sociological documentary talking about the fact that about 20% of African American men live with and/or take care of their families. I had seen that percentage (80% who do not) in other studies. Hopefully that number is improving. The documentary was done from the point of view of the 20%. One of the participants described (themselves) as the silent 20% who are quietly living their lives, taking care of their families and staying out of the news.

I have read (and blogged) about Anna Quindlen and her marrying a boy friend or marrying a husband concept.

I also, after having been around a fair number of women from different cultures, I have the (personal) viewpoint that women will continue to raise their sons in the same cultural/historical way, even though they (these same women) do not like how the adult men of their same culture act. This is how I summarize my  (personal) thinking - you can take the boy out of X, but you can't take X out of the boy,  even if the boy was born and raised in totally different, more advanced country.  I would put my own grandmother in that category. As much as she loved her girls, she would have sold the whole lot of us if she thought it would advance her only son. And she really had no respect for him, or for her husband, but considered them more important than her daughters or granddaughters. She would argue to hear me say that. And during her life her daughters would have argued with me also, saying I did not understand. But after her death and my grandfathers death, they would agree.

Someone might read all that and think I can be racist and sexist in the same three paragraphs, but it is sociology to me. It is cultural. And that is (part of) what I thought as I read.

 Their Eyes Were Watching God was short. It was 6 CD's and 7.25 audible hours.

The dialectic and stories were extremely well done. The version I listened to was narrated by Michele-Denise Woods. She even sang in it. Truly great reading. There is also an audio version by Ruby Dee.

Somewhere I read an article comparing Their Eyes Were watching God to Huckleberry Finn. In my opinion that is fair if you take the ridiculous Tom Sawyer (who I cannot stand) out of it. I mention the idea because it gives a very general comparison. Part of what brings that to mind is that they are both southern books. And the story telling and dialect in each. However, Their Eyes Were watching God was a richer book with more depth, in my opinion.

If there is anyone out there who has read this book, Their Eyes Were watching God, I have a question about the ending for you. Did anyone ever get her the shot series? Did I miss it? Is it an oversight? Or a statement about what happens at the end of the book?

my books - Cutting for Stone (2009) by Abraham Verghese

It is February and I (now) try to read at least a couple Black History books each February.

The majority of this story takes place in Africa and was written by an Ethiopian born, of Indian parents, medical doctor.

So, I knew that (Africa, Ethiopia) as I was considering reading this book.

And I was a little nervous about the title. I wondered what the title might be saying about the book's content. And Ethiopia worried me a bit too. All I could picture was children starving in make shift camps.

This might be a common concern, because I over heard two women talking about this book and one reassured the other that they were not doing surgery with a stone nor with the patient lying on a stone.

She went on to explain that she thought the word stone (in the title) comes from one of the doctors whose last name is Stone.  And he happens to be a surgeon, hence the word cutting.

That is true, there are doctors with the name of Stone in the book.  But I think the line actually comes from the Hippocratic Oath.

English translation, version 2 of The Hippocratic Oath
I swear by Apollo, the healer, Asclepius, Hygieia, and Panacea, and I take to witness all the gods, all the goddesses, to keep according to my ability and my judgment, the following Oath and agreement: To consider dear to me, as my parents, him who taught me this art; to live in common with him and, if necessary, to share my goods with him; To look upon his children as my own brothers, to teach them this art; and that by my teaching, I will impart a knowledge of this art to my own sons, and to my teacher's sons, and to disciples bound by an indenture and oath according to the medical laws, and no others. I will prescribe regimens for the good of my patients according to my ability and my judgment and never do harm to anyone. I will give no deadly medicine to any one if asked, nor suggest any such counsel; and similarly I will not give a woman a pessary to cause an abortion. But I will preserve the purity of my life and my arts. I will not cut for stone, even for patients in whom the disease is manifest; I will leave this operation to be performed by practitioners, specialists in this art. In every house where I come I will enter only for the good of my patients, keeping myself far from all intentional ill-doing and all seduction and especially from the pleasures of love with women or men, be they free or slaves. All that may come to my knowledge in the exercise of my profession or in daily commerce with men, which ought not to be spread abroad, I will keep secret and will never reveal. If I keep this oath faithfully, may I enjoy my life and practice my art, respected by all humanity and in all times; but if I swerve from it or violate it, may the reverse be my life.

Back to the two ladies I overheard discussing this book:
She went on to explain that the book is about the people who work at a mission hospital. (The doctors and nurses and nuns are mostly from England and India.)

She said - So yes, there is a lot of medical stuff and there is political upheavel and all kinds of stuff you would associate with that part of Africa. The book is about what they do. It talks about the people/families who are part of the hospital staff.

So that was my expectation, from my little eavesdropping adventure, the book was about what they do.

And from having been involved with girls from the Middle East, I know family stories can read like a novel, like one can't quite believe ALL THAT can happen to one person or one family, but I know it can.




This book was 19 CD's and 24 audible hours, so it took me a while to finish. Each day youngest would get in the car returning from her after school activities and I would (contentedly) sigh - this book is sooooo good.

It is not a book for the VERY squeamish as there are a lot of medical procedures and conditions described. I would have guessed that would have bothered me, but it did not (back to that - it's what they do concept).  Youngest would never have been able to read it. She is that level of squeamish. However she can read/watch Les Mis, and I cannot.

When I read the New York Times' review (I waited until after I read the book, as it does give away some of the plot), the reviewer complained about all the medical details.  I thought - come on lady it is about doctors where medicine (and missionary health care) is these people's whole life.

The NYT review also complained about the detail and order the author used in presenting the characters' back stories. That did not bother me either. I think most of us figure out the stories of our lives later rather than earlier.

In case you hadn't noticed, I LOVED THIS BOOK.






In many of the books I read, classic books are referenced.

As I mentioned two weeks ago with Reading Lolita in Tehran, I was thrilled to discover an actual list of the books referenced in the novel.

So, when I started Cutting for Stone and in Chapter 15 other novels were referenced, I took notes.

I listen to audible editions. I had to try to remember titles until I was stopped in traffic and could jot a note. So if you are reading this book later and notice any titles I missed, please leave a note for me in comments. I will see it, no matter how far in the future.

Middlemarch: A Study of Provincial Life (1874) by George Eliot (the pen name of Mary Anne Evans, later Marian Evans).

Les Trois Villes (1894–98; The Three Cities) by Émile Zola

The Man-Eater of Malgudi (1961) by R. K. Narayan

The Hornblower series by C. S. Forester consists of eleven novels (one unfinished) and five short stories (written between 1937 and 1967, the stories take place between 1808 and 1848)).

Alice's Adventures in Wonderland (1865) by Charles Lutwidge Dodgson (pseudonym Lewis Carroll).

my books - Oliver Twist (1838) by Charles Dickens

I thought I was going to be able to say no one at my house read Oliver Twist, but when I inquired, youngest started it one year, got assigned another book for school, and never finished Oliver. She said she enjoyed what she read and was able to understand it.


Here is the Context section by SparkNotes.

It gives background information on Dickens as well as explaining the social commentary of Oliver Twist. These sections do not give away the plot of the book.


I did enjoy Oliver Twist.

I have mentioned in previous posts:  I love Dickens. He is a recent find for me. I never read any of his books in school.

However, Oliver is my least favorite of the Dickens I have read so far.

So, I liked it; I just liked Bleak House, Great Expectations, A Tale of Two Cities better.

I did not find any of these books, including Oliver, predictable. I was never sure where the story might take me. I do not find the length of Dickens books to be daunting, because the stories keep me captivated.

However, I will say, my first Dickens was Bleak House. And truthfully, I had a hard time with all the characters. But I think that was because I happened to read one of his more complicated plots first.  Great Expectations is a simple book, not as many characters, more straight forward plot. That is the place to start (in my opinion).  Bleak House is 33 audible hours, Great Expectations/18 hours,  A Tale of Two Cities/14 hours, Oliver Twist/16 hours, so you can see that Bleak House was a daunting start. 

I found I caught/understood Dickens subtext better in Oliver than any of the titles. After reading the SparkNotes Context section (link above) it might be there is more subtext in Oliver than any of the other books. Many lines in Oliver were very funny, even in the midst of the extreme poverty, in an ironic humor kind of way. I am sure I did not catch all of it, but I noticed a lot.

I also think that Oliver might be the most important of Dickens' books based on the Context section (link above) of those I have read so far. Most important at the time, most important in capturing history for the ages.

If you ever have a chance to see Oliver! (the musical) it is very good. The play does not follow the book in full, there are whole sections missing, but does a good job of the essence of the novel. (What is in the musical is in the book, but not everything in the book is in the musical.) The music is very good.

my books - Reading Lolita in Tehran: A Memoir in Books (2003) by Azar Nafisi

I loved this book.

It is warm and rich and very well done.

It can be read on many, many levels.



I would have loved this book even more if I had known a few things before reading it. So, this post is mostly talking about those hints.


Wiki's Plot Outline:

The book is a memoir of the experience of the author who returned to Iran during the revolution (1978-1981) and lived and taught in the Islamic Republic of Iran until her departure in 1997. It narrates her teaching at the University of Tehran after 1979, her refusal to submit to the rule to wear the veil and her subsequent expulsion from the university, life during the Iran-Iraq war, her return to teaching at the University of Allameh Tabatabei (1981), her resignation (1987), the formation of her book club (1995–97), and her decision to emigrate. Events are interlaced with the stories of book club members consisting of seven of her female students, who met weekly at Nafisi's house to discuss works of Western literatureincluding the controversial 'Lolita' and the texts are interpreted through the books they read.

I mentioned last week, I re-read Lolita in preparation for Reading Lolita in Tehran.

If my reading group facilitator had read Reading Lolita in Tehran before making the assignments, I think he would actually have had us read at least six books in advance of Professor Nafisi's work:

The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald
Daisy Miller and Washington Square by Henry James
Lolita, Invitation to a Beheading by Vladimir Nabokov
Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen

Those six books are discussed at length in the novel.


I had read Lolita and The Great Gatsby and Pride and Prejudice. I do not think I have read anything by Henry James, but have added him to one of my other group's potential/future books list.

Any comments on Henry James? I am trying to figure out how I have not read anything by him - ?

There are a great many other novels referenced in Reading Lolita in Tehran, but not in as much detail. The six I listed above are discussed in enough detail that I really think having read them adds to Nafisi's book.

There is a complete listing at the bottom of the Wiki article (under Cited Books) of all the books. If you happen to be looking for a worthwhile classics reading list, that would be a very good place to start (in my opinion). A reading group could even take this on as a (really great) long project.


Other hints for Reading Lolita in Tehran:
Look at the time line included in the Wiki paragraph at the top of my post. The books skips around a bit. The book starts with the Reading Group (Part 1). Her teaching years and the Iran/Iraq war are in Part 2. Part 3 is the Reading Group and them moving to the USA.  So the book is not in chronological order.

If you have a hard time keeping track of the girls in Nafisi's reading group, or her students in general, I suggest making a list. Because these girls are in Part 1 of the book and then resurface in the rest of the book.  I did not keep a list, but I wish I had! Just the name and a note (X - boy friend in turkey/difficult brother, Y - find a prostitute and stop looking at my sister, etc). The names are a bit confusing if you are not used to middle eastern names. I know about 8 middle eastern women, know those names well, but none of these names were the same and honestly they sort of all sounded alike to me.  If you read the book and do keep a list of names/notes, I would be so appreciate of a copy pasted in comments attached to this post. No matter how far in the future, no matter how simple the format, I will see it and be glad.


Here is the Yale Review of Reading Lolita in Tehran.

The New York Times review is here.


Here is a 3+ minute video of Azar Nafisi speaking on the topic of her book. If you look on the right side bar of that link, there are a variety of other Nafisi videos available.

If you are wondering if Nafisi is still in contact with any of her students, there is a video.

If you are wondering where Nafisi is now:

"The Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS), a division of Johns Hopkins University based in Washington, D.C., United States, is one of the world's leading graduate schools devoted to the study of international affairs, economics, diplomacy, and policy research and education." (She is listed as faculty at the bottom of that Wiki page).

I honestly thought the audio version of this book was read by the author until I finished and looked. It was not. But they chose well. Very good accent. Very good audio voice. It is Lisette Lecat who is actually from South Africa. How typically American, to think a South African Accent might be from the Middle East. If ME had been here, she would have known it was not a Persian accent. She could tell in a glance by clothes and stance where in the Middle East most people (here) originated. And South African explains why I loved the accent. One of my yoga instructors is from South Africa and I am very use to listening to her. She even sings and chants to us.

My books - Lolita (1955) by Vladamir Nabokov

My reading assignment was actually Reading Lolita in Tehran: A Memoir in Books  (2003) by Iranian author and professor Azar Nafisi. I believe it was on the best seller list for many weeks (over 100) and translated into thirty-two languages. I will write about that book next Wednesday. But I mention it so you will understand I read Lolita in preparation for reading Azar Nafisi's discussion of it.

As it turns out, there are actually a whole series of novels that should be read in preparation for Reading Lolita in Tehran. I will talk more about that next week.

Yes, the reading assignment for one of my book groups was to read both books for discussion. This is the group facilitator who is often very ambitious in his assignments (4 plays by Chekhov one month last fall and I had to watch BBC versions to understand them).

And yes, the Lolita/Reading Lolita in Tehran dual assignment, the fact they were assigned, made a great deal of difference in my reading.

I was reading Lolita even more intellectually than normal. No, it did not bother me. Yes, it might bother others. I was actually (more) worried (about being worried) before I started Reading Lolita in Tehran.

If you remember, I have experience with girls from the middle east. One lived with us for over a year. We helped with another one for over another year. And we have hosted several for a day or two here and there. And I have an acquaintance who is from Iran; we speak of the middle east often. She has been here since she fled with her very small children during the Iran-Iraq war (1980-1988). She is college educated (was working on her masters when she fled) and very bright.

The middle east element did not bother me either.





This week, I am writing about Lolita.

Wiki notes:

Lolita is a novel by Vladimir Nabokov, written in English and published in 1955 in Paris and 1958 in New York. It was later translated by its Russian-native author into Russian. The novel is notable for its controversial subject: the protagonist and unreliable narrator, middle-aged literature professor Humbert Humbert, is obsessed with the 12-year-old Dolores Haze . . .His private nickname for Dolores is Lolita.

Here is the SparkNotes Context Section. It does not give away the plot of the book other than to reference the main character as a pedophile.




The first thing I would like to say about Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov is that every unmarried mother, considering dating, should read it.

Especially the online dating moms who reference their children in any way on their profile or on their first dozen dates with a man.

I know there are women who will read that and think - but I am a packaged deal with my children and a man dating me should know that up front. I understand that gut reaction.

But the truth is pedophiles and controlling men use the internet to sort out their targets.

Pedophiles and controlling men are very good at what they do, you will not be able to pick them out of a crowd. They will seem nice. They will seem genuinely caring and concerned and interested in the kids. They are VERY GOOD at what they do. And they zoom right in on a target.

If you are in a room of women and ask who knows of at least one child who was sexually, psychologically, or physically abused by a mother's boyfriend/husband, nearly every hand will go up. Many women will know of many different cases among their friends and relatives. If you ask how many of these men are now in jail, there will be some. And I am here to say it is very hard to convict men for these offenses. There are a great number still walking around free. A great number.




This book is extremely well written. The use of language, style, grace is beautiful. Nabokov was brilliant. The subtext is smart, clever.

I am sure an annotated version of this book would be very rich (in Azar Nafisi's Reading Lolita in Tehran: A Memoir in Books they read annotated copies.).  I am sure many of Lolita's references went over my head. That was okay, I understood enough. I stuck to my audible version. I did not stop to look up the French lines nor all the things that were obvious references, and I still caught a fair amount and enjoyed it.

Yes, I enjoyed the book, subject matter and all. I did not take it personally, on any level, I could tell the difference between me and mine and words written in a book.

I read looking for clues about Humbert Humbert. I read to see what made him tick and what he thought and did. He was very focused and driven and cunning. I read to understand the book so that I could move on to the second part of the assignment - Reading Lolita in Tehran.




I do not seek out upsetting or sad books. But so far, I have been able to handle, with no issues, whatever is assigned in my various reading groups and be absolutely fine with them. (I did skip Sophie's Choice last year; this year I think I could handle it just fine).

My therapist said this is boundary work. I know where I start and stop. And where the rest of the world starts and stops.

My boundary work has been my most recent effort (the last two years) and was really necessary for the well being of my whole life.

Gretchen's Relationship/Socialization/Family Improvement posts

If you missed them, they were very good. Very good.
This link will take you to the whole collection.