13. An American Tragedy by Theodore Dreiser

I picked An American Tragedy for my first classic because I've always wanted to read it. The basic story seems to be repeated frequently in works of pop culture (Woody Allen's Match Point comes to mind), and I always thought it would be interesting to go to the source, so to speak. Had I known about the 870+ page length, I might not have been so eager.

An American Tragedy is the story of Clyde Griffiths. Raised by poor and devoutly religious parents, who force him to participate in their street missionary work, the ambitious but immature Clyde is anxious to achieve better things. His troubles begin when he takes a job as a bellboy at a local hotel. The boys he meets are much more sophisticated than he, and they introduce Clyde to the world of alcohol and prostitution. Clyde enjoys his new lifestyle and does everything in his power to win the affections of the flirtatious Hortense Briggs. But Clyde's life is forever changed when a stolen car in which he's traveling kills a young child. Clyde flees Kansas City, and after a brief stay in Chicago, he reestablishes himself as a foreman at the collar factory of his wealthy long-lost uncle in Lycurgus, New York, who meets Clyde through a stroke of fortune. The uncle does his best to help Clyde and advances him to a position of relative importance within the factory.

Although Clyde vows not to consort with women in the way that caused his Kansas City downfall, he is swiftly attracted to Roberta Alden, a poor and very innocent farm girl working under him at the factory. Clyde initially enjoys the secretive relationship (forbidden by factory rules) and virtually coerces Roberta into sex, but his ambition forces him to realize that he could never marry her. He dreams of the elegant Sondra Finchley, the daughter of a wealthy Lycurgus man and a family friend of his uncle's. As developments between he and Sondra begin to look promising, Roberta discovers that she is pregnant. Having unsuccessfully attempted to procure an abortion for Roberta, who expects him to marry her, Clyde procrastinates while his relationship with Sondra continues to mature. When he realizes that he has a genuine chance to marry Sondra, and after Roberta threatens to reveal their relationship unless he marries her, Clyde hatches a plan to murder Roberta in a fashion that will seem accidental. Clyde takes Roberta for a canoe ride on Big Bittern Lake in upstate New York and rows to a remote area. As he speaks to her regarding the end of their relationship, Roberta moves towards him, and he strikes her in the face with his camera, stunning her and capsizing the boat. Unable to swim, Roberta drowns while Clyde, who is unwilling to save her, swims to shore. The trail of circumstantial evidence points to murder, and the local authorities are only too eager to convict Clyde. Following a sensational trial before an unsympathetic audience, and despite a vigorous defense mounted by two lawyers hired by his uncle, Clyde is convicted, sentenced to death, and executed.

(In the interest of fairness, I admit that most of that plot summary came from Wikipedia. I'm sorry, but how do you sum up 870+ pages without ripping your hair out in frustration?)

I think I was prone to sympathize with Clyde based on his humble beginnings. His parents prized faith and good works for others over comfort for their family, to the point of denying Clyde and his siblings proper shelter, food and even education. You can't necessarily blame him for feeling somewhat detached emotionally from them and prone to jealousy of those who have what he doesn't. But his overwhelming self interest prevents whole-hearted sympathy. When Clyde begins work as a bellboy and starts to earn decent money, he saves it all for himself rather than contributing to his family's needs. I can understand not giving the money to his parents; after all, they chose this life and seem happy to exist in poverty. But what about his younger siblings? How can he justify denying them what he has been denied? From very early on in the book it's apparent that Clyde has a strong sense of self preservation over caring for the needs of others. He's so consumed by his own struggles that he simply does not consider how his actions affect other people. After a child was killed by the car that Clyde and his friends were joy-riding in, there's not one mention in his internal dialogue of the child, her family or the pain that was caused to them. His only focus is escaping the authorities and saving himself. When Clyde discovered that his unmarried sister, Esta, was pregnant and had been abandoned by the father of her child, he was outraged. He wondered what kind of man would behave so despicably. But later, when Roberta is forcing his hand and he can see no way out of marrying her, he is outraged again -- but this time on his own behalf. Esta didn't blackmail the father of her child into marrying her, and everything turned out fine for her. Now he wonders how Roberta can do such a thing to him, conveniently ignoring the bleak reality facing Roberta as an unwed mother. Clyde is the hero of his own story, and accordingly casts himself in the best possible light in every situation. Although he knows that he plotted to murder Roberta in cold blood, after the fact he is desperate to justify his actions. This leaves him vulnerable to the months of testimony coaching from his lawyers, who have managed to put a positive spin on Clyde's story.

I read some reviews online when preparing to write this response, many of which claim that this work is Dreiser's indictment of the American Dream. As one writer from enotes.com put it, "The idea of the American Dream is that all Americans have the opportunity to improve themselves economically and socially. In America, it is said, a person's circumstances at birth place no limit on his or her potential; people can make of themselves whatever they choose and rise as high as they are willing to climb. If Dreiser's message in An American Tragedy can be summed up in a sentence, it is: the American Dream is a lie." I think this may be overstating it a bit. Does this analysis assume that Clyde is meant to be an everyman? That is to say, in the same situation, anyone would have acted in the same manner and met the same end? If so, why did Dreiser set much of the action in the world of Clyde's uncle, Samuel Griffiths? The elder Griffiths is a solid example of working one's way up, economically and socially, to the top of the caste system of the time. To me, it seemed like readers were shown two conclusions of the American Dream, one successful and one spectacularly unsuccessful, to demonstrate that it is possible to achieve if one does not give in to temptations or weakness. Clyde is ultimately one of the weakest characters I have ever encountered. He showed no willpower to resist the lures of sex, money or power. He showed very little willingness to actually work his way up. His tendency was to take the the shortcut to success; for example, instead of concentrating on performing well at his job in order to advance, he was confident that marrying the socialite Sondra would give him financial and social security and command the respect of his family. That is Clyde's concept of success.

This story is surprisingly relevant today. As I said above, these themes seem to repeat in current pop culture constantly. The infamous case of Scott Peterson comes to mind; an unfaithful man murders his young wife and unborn child, and the attention of the nation is caught and held captive. The media interest in Clyde's trial feels very familiar as Dreiser is describing it; journalists track down Clyde's family for background information, print Roberta's pathetic letters verbatim, pepper Clyde's mother with insensitive questions. Sondra's family uses their considerable money and power to keep her name out of the proceedings altogether. In a way, it feels like a modern work. But make no mistake, this book is work. I read that it was called by one influential critic "the worst-written great novel in the world." I can see that. The prose is extremely dense, and Dreiser's relentless detail bogs down the narrative. While I was invested in the story, it was difficult to stay invested because the action moved so slowly. Unless you are well prepared to put in the effort, I can't recommend this book to you. But if you're ready, willing and able to be patient with Dreiser and with Clyde, you may not regret giving this one a chance.

The breakdown.

As you may have noticed, An American Tragedy by Theodore Dreiser has been in the Currently Reading tab for quite some time now. I think about a month. It's seriously taking forever. I'm closing in on it, though -- I have less than 100 pages left! I plan on finishing up tonight, and hopefully posting a response tomorrow.

I've been thinking about the breakdown of books to read that I outlined in my original post. I had planned to read 17 so-called classics, but that now seems ill-suited for this project for a few different reasons.

An American Tragedy, like many classics, takes a long time to read -- as it should. It's not meant to be read in one or two sittings.

The point of the project is to read many books and different types of books. I can't achieve the goal of 100 (which I still really want to hit) if I'm spending weeks with one book at a time.

Thinking about the average person, how many classics do they read in a year?

So I've revised the breakdown as follows:

25 suggestions

I am now still taking suggestions! You can leave a comment on this post or e-mail me. I will read 20 25 books that have been suggested, no matter what. I reserve some veto power, though. If a suggestion really and truly sounds like something I would not enjoy or get anything out of reading, I will strike it from the list. I will limit the vetoing based on the number of suggestions that I receive, and will try to keep it to three. I upped the number of suggestions from 20 because the suggestions that I have received thus far are so varied, and reading more of them will only help me branch out and try new things.

5 "classics"

I realize the term "classic" is subjective. I will be using Time's The Complete List and Random House's Modern Library to base my selections on. I didn't want to do away with this category simply because reading classics can be time-consuming. I tried to decrease the number to something that I thought I could reasonably get through. Fingers crossed!

10 books that have been adapted into movies
This just sounds like fun. I may or may not have seen the movie, but this will be the first time reading each book. No change.

10 biographies and/or autobiographies
I will try to read about a variety of people, but I won't plan ahead so much as to break it down here. No change.

10 other non-fiction
While biographies and autobiographies are non-fiction, I'd like to try and read 10 other non-fiction books as well. Again, varying topics. No change.

5 mysteries

I enjoy mysteries, always have. It's tempting to read the last page of the book first but I will try not to for this challenge! No change.

5 science fiction/fantasy
If you know me at all, you know that I am not a sci fi fan. I'm going to try and give this genre a fair chance, though. I decided to increase the number from 3 to 5 because my sister advised to break this into two categories, science fiction and fantasy. She knows more about these genres, so I'm taking her advice and will try to read a couple of each.

2 graphic novels
I have never read a graphic novel, and figure it's about time. No change.

1 romance
Just because. No change.

1 Oprah's book club pick
I'm not really an Oprah person, and any book club picks that I've read previously weren't on purpose. No change.

1 Colin's pick
Colin gets one pick that I have to read no matter what. I have no idea what he'll come up with, and I can't wait to see. No change. I think I will save his pick, Good Omens by Neil Gaiman and Terry Pratchett, for last.

And the remaining 20 25 will be made up of books that I hear about or that catch my eye at the library. Because a lot of books catch my eye.

Yesterday, I was thinking about my list of categories and wondering if there was any other category or type of book that I was interested in adding. I had an idea after seeing a blog post about Banned Books Week -- why not add a category for banned books? As I looked through the list of frequently challenged books, I realized that I already had one! Did you know that An American Tragedy is on the list of frequently challenged classics? Apparently it was burned by the Nazis in Germany (1933) because it "deals with low love affairs."

12. Hannibal by Thomas Harris

Hannibal was recommended by The Grammarphile. I can safely say that I would not have read this book if not for this project. I've never really been interested in the tales of Hannibal Lecter, less so after my freshman year roommates forced me to watch The Silence of the Lambs -- with the lights off! It was mean. It's really the horror aspect that puts me off; otherwise, this sort of thing is right up my alley. I like mysteries, psychology was one of my majors in college, and there's a strong female protaganist to root for.

Hannibal takes place seven years after the events of The Silence of the Lambs. Clarice Starling's FBI career has been somewhat stalled after her successful capture of the serial killer Jame Gumb, and she's poised to take the fall after a drug raid gone bad. Her mentor manages to save her job with an important assignment connected to the infamous Dr. Lecter. One of his earliest victims survived Lecter's brutal attack, and has managed to track down a clue that he needs the FBI to verify. Mason Verger has tracked Lecter to Italy, using the immense resources that his wealth affords him. His source, disgraced Italian detective Rinaldo Pazzi, plans to "sell" Lecter to Verger rather than turn him in. Verger's men arrive in Florence to kidnap Lecter, but he manages to escape after killing Pazzi and another conspirator. Lecter makes his way back to the United States to settle his score with Verger and reacquaint himself with Starling.

When I first started the book, something about the rhythm threw me off for the first few chapters. I quickly became immersed in the story, and I'm sure what felt different at first. This is the kind of book that you put down for awhile and try to do something else, but you can't stay away for long. Un-put-down-able, I think they call it.

My favorite part was Pazzi's pursuit of Lecter. I liked reading about his fall from grace and how he pieced together the true identity of the man known in Florence as Dr. Fell. It wasn't hard to understand (and maybe empathize with) him and his decision to "sell" Dr. Lecter rather than turn him in to the authorities. He was definitely someone that I rooted for, and even though his demise wasn't difficult to see coming, it still made me a bit sad.

The parts that I didn't like? Anything having to do with Mason Verger. From his family's history in the meat packing industry, to his own sadistic childhood and adult behavior, to his plans for Dr. Lecter. There's no sympathy to be had for this son of a bitch. Everything he says and does makes me uncomfortable in some fundamental way. I can't stand reading about people being hurt the way that Verger delights in hurting them. Skin, commence crawling. It's almost to the point where I don't get anything out of the reading except feeling disgusted.

I didn't love the parts about Clarice Starling, but that may be because I haven't read The Silence of the Lambs. While you don't need to be familiar with the story before reading Hannibal, I think it would have been helpful in feeling more toward Starling. You can't help but admire her resourcefulness in pursuing Dr. Lecter and her composure in the face of being screwed by the good ole boys politicking in Washington. But the ending really threw me for a loop. I don't feel like I knew Starling well enough to understand where she ended up.

Hannibal is pretty dark and twisty, so don't pick it up unless you're prepared for it to haunt you for awhile after you put it down. It's a good read, though, and I recommend it to you.

11. Watchmen by Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons

I had never heard of Watchmen before people (read: Colin) started talking about the movie adaptation. All I really knew about the story was that superhero vigilantes were outlawed and the murder of one such former hero was the catalyst that set the plot in motion. Colin was really excited for the movie and even went to a midnight showing when it came out. We talked about going to see Watchmen with his mom and brother during one of their visits, but Colin thought it would be too violent for the ladies, so we went to see Taken instead. (Which is kind of funny, because it's plenty violent and features someone taking the law into their own hands.)

At any rate, it sounded interesting. I read a lot of mysteries and am drawn to procedurals on TV, and the theme of vigilantism pops up over and over again. I loved the idea of the public asking "Who watches the Watchmen?" Yes, they watch over us but who keeps them in check? Who prevents abuse of that power? I lean toward the left, and the idea of taking away someone's civil rights is despicable to me. I honestly believe that even though out current legal system has its problems, we need to operate within it. And yet... can it really be that black and white? Or are there shades of grey? That's why this theme is recurring in pop culture; you can examine the issue from different angles and come up with a different answer each time.

Having never read a graphic novel before, I had no idea what to expect. While I was excited to read it, I think I was also a little nervous. What was I getting myself into? As it turns out, I had nothing to worry about. I work as a proofreader and copy editor, and work has been extremely busy lately. Watchmen came along at the exact right moment -- not only was the story interesting, but because the medium was completely different, fresh and new, it held my attention better than a traditional novel would have.It was a relief.

Dude, I really liked it.

Okay, I liked some parts better than others. Rorschach was certainly the most compelling character to me, and the way he broke down his psychiatrist was one of the things that I kept thinking about long after that part of the story was over. I liked the way that the past was woven into the present via flashbacks and the supplemental back stories at the end of each chapter. When Laurie realized that The Comedian was her father, it kind of knocked my socks off. But what really got me was the very end, when Rorschach's journal was finally about to be discovered at the right-wing newspaper office. As Colin was saying, even the smartest man in the world couldn't pull off a flawless plan. But I didn't love The Black Freighter, and I thought the younger Nite Owl was a complete wet noodle. Also, Doc Manhattan on Mars? It didn't really speak to me. I was more interested in the interactions of the characters and what they learned from each other.

Watchmen definitely takes you on a journey, and it's funny to realize that it only takes place over a few days. The world that these characters live in is drawn, pun intended, so completely and convincingly that you kind of forget about everything else while you're there. I love how you get so many different perspectives on the events that take place, and they're all valid. You may not agree with Veidt or Rorschach, but you can't write them off. Not a lot of fiction is that fair to its characters, and it really worked. I think it showed a level of respect for the audience and I appreciated it.

10. All Other Nights by Dara Horn

My friend Adriana recommended some websites to me when I asked for book suggestions. I found the description of All Other Nights on one of those websites, and immediately requested it from the library.

This is the story of Jacob, a young Jewish soldier in the American Civil War. He is recruited to act as a spy for the Union, and his missions include killing his uncle who plotted to assassinate Lincoln, and marrying a young Jewish woman doing spy work for the Confederacy. He unexpectedly falls in love with his wife while he is supposed to be collecting evidence against her, but they are separated when her sister turns him in just as Jacob reports his sister-in-law to his superiors. Jacob reads of his wife's death in prison, and later suffers devastating injuries during a Confederate raid. After returning home to New York, he learns of the possibility that his wife is alive and well. He sets out to find her, and eventually meets their daughter.

This book was interesting with detailed, engaging story-telling. The experiences of Jewish Americans during this era was something that I had never thought about. Although this was a novel, the author was inspired by many actual people (detailed in an Author's Note at the end) and I came away feeling as though I may have learned something new.

I had a couple of problems with the novel, though. Throughout his story, Jacob is unable to say no to people. His parents arrange a marriage for him, and instead of refusing he runs away and joins the army. His superiors order him to murder his uncle, and he does it despite his doubts about it. He is asked to marry a stranger in order to collect evidence, and he goes through with it. We don't really get any insight into why he does this, especially when he is racked with guilt over his actions. Also, the novel ended somewhat abruptly. During a chaotic attack on the southern town in which he found his wife alive and well, Jacob is attempting to flee to the north. It's quite suspenseful, and you're not sure what's going to happen. It feels very much like the middle of the story. Then Jacob's wife shows up and he sees his daughter for the first time and it just... ends. It's just over. While it was an enjoyable read, I just didn't know what to make of the ending.

9. In the Woods by Tana French

This book was recommended to me by Fat Bridesmaid. I'm definitely going to have to read her other suggestions too, because I really liked this one.

I read In the Woods on a Sunday, and after I told Colin about it, he decided to read it too. This post has been on hold for awhile, because there's no way I can write it without spoilers and I didn't want to spoil it for him. So everyone has their fair warning, right?

SPOILERS TO FOLLOW.

This story centers around a young detective named Adam Robert Ryan, who tells us about working to solve a young girl's murder. Rob has a very close relationship with his partner, Cassie, and she knows more about him than any of their colleagues. As a child, Rob was known as Adam to his best friends Jamie and Peter. He can remember almost nothing of their childhood together, nor of the day that they disappeared in the woods by their town and he was found clutching a tree, with blood soaked through his shoes. No trace of Jamie or Peter has ever been found. However, Rob does not consider his story to be especially tragic, and leads his life in relative anonymity. Until the Katy Devlin case lands on his desk. Katy's body is found at the site of an archaeological dig in the town where Rob lived until Jamie and Peter (and Adam) disappeared. Throughout the investigation, Rob and Cassie begin to suspect that something was wrong in Katy's home. Her sisters seem troubled and the detectives focus on the nature of the father's relationships with his daughters. The case takes on a life of its own and Rob and Cassie's friendship begins to dissolve after a night of unexpected passion. After some twists and turns, it's revealed that Katy's older sister Rosalind orchestrated her murder, using a worker from the dig as her patsy. As Cassie was able to suss out, but Rob wasn't, Rosalind was a classic sociopath and had no qualms about eliminating her "uppity" little sister by using her wiles to convince a young man to do her bidding.

Rob tells us the story of working this case after the fact, which is very effective. He's gained some insight and perspective, and alludes to things he could have done differently without giving away the ending. Clues were dropped in subtly throughout the story so that the end surprised you, but didn't come out of nowhere. Had you been paying attention to the right parts, you could have put the puzzle pieces together. I think that's what makes for a great mystery. You can feel as though the author is speaking to you on your level, even if you didn't guess the outcome.

Rob's story is amazing. He has vague bits and pieces of memory of this idyllic childhood with great friends. He knows something terrible and tragic happened to the three of them, but has never been able to remember what. He was sent away to boarding school afterward and his parents moved to another town, so he's never truly had to revisit the events of the past. During the Devlin case, Rob is forced to confront the past, and he comes to terms with the enormity of what he has lost. He has been robbed of his life with Jamie and Peter, and is able to finally realize that and mourn for it.

Let's get to the frustrating part. Although Rob starts to regain some memories of his childhood while working the case (the Devlin father turns out to be a teenager that Rob knew of as a child), he never remembers what happened to Jamie and Peter.

You never find out what happened to Jamie and Peter!

I can understand why the author might have felt it would have been a cop-out to reveal what happened -- she had set up the promise of an unsolved, unsolvable mystery. But when Rob started to piece together things that he hadn't been able to remember, you naturally assume that he'll be able to figure out the events of that day. The two parallel mysteries from Rob's past and present unfold simultaneously, and when you find out what happened to Katy, you naturally assume that you'll find out what happened to Jamie and Peter. You just naturally assume that there will be some sort of pay-off at the end, and you're totally left hanging.

When Colin was about halfway through, he shared a theory with me. He thought that Peter killed Jamie and traumatized Adam on that fateful day, and now killed Katy as an adult. It killed me to not react, because I was thinking that while I enjoyed In the Woods tremendously, I want to read that book!

Quick update!

Hello, faithful readers!

It has been too long, for a couple of reasons:

1. Work has been soul-crushingly busy. 

(I know, I know. I shouldn't complain, because I have a good job with a good, GROWING company in these trying economic times. As an American, I reserve the right to complain.)

2. I loved In the Woods by Tana French so much, and read it so quickly, that Colin decided to read it. I cannot post a spoiler-free response to this one, so I purposefully held off on posting anything until he was done. I'm a good wife. 

Colin is done with In the Woods, so you can expect a post soon. I also finished a novel by the name of All Other Nights by Dara Horn, so that response is forth-coming as well. As you can see from the Currently Reading section, I'm on to my first graphic novel, Watchmen. It's new and different, and interesting -- which frankly, is just what my tired eyes need at the moment!

So even though the blog looks neglected, I am still very much enjoying the Magnolia Reads project. Please stay tuned!