web
counter
 

littlewomenmarch.jpg
100 Books in One Year: March by Geraldine Brooks

Cannonball Read / Nicole

Book Reviews | December 23, 2008 | Comments (19)


For readers of Louisa May Alcott’s Little Women, the patriarch of the March family is more of an idea than a reality for most of the first half of the novel, as he is off with the Union army ministering to the soldiers as a chaplain. There are hints that Mr. March was, at one time, a man of some fortune, but the family is rather on the poor side at the time that we first meet them and no real backstory is ever provided. Nor is the character of Mr. March fleshed out much more than as the benevolent head of the household, a learned man who gently guides his wife, Marmee, and four daughters in their day-to-day lives through his letters and later his presence after he returns from the war.

After reading Brooks’ March, I could only wish that she had left Alcott’s masterpiece alone. Instead, she takes it upon herself to tell the story of a man who should have been remembered with vague affection, and instead is revealed to be a naive, weak-willed, gullible, and selfish narcissist. He stubbornly believes that he knows what is best for the people around him, whether it be the welfare of the slaves at a plantation he visits during his early years as a peddler (taking it upon himself to teach a slave child her letters after being expressly forbidden by the master to do so); his wife, whom he marries for her high spirits and keen mind but then tries to subdue when she will not behave as he believes a wife should; his family, when he squanders his entire fortune giving money to the rebel John Brown and is reduced to moving them into little more than a shack; his daughters, who are forced to go out and work to support the household after his folly; and the men around him in the army, to whom his idealism and sense of self-righteousness do more harm than good and lead to his transfer from his regiment because, essentially, no one can stand the man.

In the course of the war, March cheats on his wife with a slave named Grace, whom he had met many years before on that plantation, and justifies it in this way:

There are many things I have told myself since, in exculpation for what I felt at that moment. I have tried to plead that fatigue had blurred my judgment; that amid so much death the body’s compulsion to reach for life, to the very act of generation, could not be gain-said. This much is true: at that moment I believed that the most moral act I could perform would be the one that would unite us, completely. I wanted to give the lie to every claim of difference save the God-ordained one of Genesis: man an woman created he them.

But this, also, is true: I wanted her. The thought of her - arched, shuddering, abandoned - thrilled me to the core.

EW. When I was young, I adored Little Women and wanted a father like the March girls had. Reading this passage was like hearing my parents have sex. I gag a little each time I think about it.

Eventually March falls ill and is sent to a war hospital in Washington, which is where Marmee March comes in. The second half of the novel is told from her perspective, and she learns the truth of everything from Grace, who is now a nurse with the army. Because she has no other choice, she sacks up, tends to her husband, and carries on with her marriage as though she hasn’t been shattered in a way that can never be mended.

Honestly, as a reader who has loved Little Women so well and for so long, I wish that I’d never picked up this tripe. I remember reading the dreadful “sequel” to Gone with the Wind and thinking “ugh, what shit,” but it didn’t ruin my favorite book because the events of Margaret Mitchell’s beautiful saga were fixed, and Alexandra Ripley’s Scarlett couldn’t take away from that. On the other hand, reading March cast a sort of pall over a character and a novel that I had enjoyed for over twenty years. The moral of this review? If you see a book that is trying to ride the coattails of a beloved classic, back away slowly, boys and girls. Just back away.

This review is part of the Cannonball Read series. Details are here and the growing number of participants and their blogs are here. And check here for more of Nicole’s reviews.









Each Time You Like, Share, Tweet or Stumble a Pajiba Post, An Angel Does the Paul Rudd Dance



Star Trek Dr. Who | DVD Releases 12/23/08









Comments

I also despised this novel. It ruined Mr. March, and it made me angry.
Bah.
Brooks skewered a beloved father-figure. For me, it was as if I had walked in on my grandfather cheating with the neighbour lady (it never happened, but now I know how I would have felt if it did).

Posted by: Pea at December 23, 2008 8:46 AM

Little Women (and the rest of the series. Which I read. Along with 8 cousins and Silver Pitchers and An Old Fashioned Girl and Jack and Jill and... No television in our house left a lot of time on my hands) was one that didn't age well for me - I couldn't ignore the heaping quantity of preachment as an adult. However, nothing excuses this.

Posted by: Megan at December 23, 2008 8:55 AM

This is now a huge trend in novels. There are now a bazillion shitty sequels, prequels, or stories from another perspective, all based on classical literature. I was in the bookstore the other day and almost threw up when I saw how many sequels there were to Pride and Prejudice. There are at least 4 by different authors. Who the hell do they think they are? They are too lazy to come up with their own idea, so they decide to ruin a perfectly good classic for the rest of us! I call shenanigans! Oh, and just in case you didn't know Nicole, there is ANOTHER shitty Gone with the Wind sequel/retelling, Rhett Butler's People. I refuse to read it on the grounds that I will commit multiple homicide.

Posted by: Blakemas! at December 23, 2008 9:06 AM

EW. This sounds awful.

I made the mistake of reading one of the Jane Austin rip-offs once. It was about a Sex and the City-ish woman who gets transported back to Jane Austin's England. She apparently instinctively knows how to dance and sew as ladies did then, but does not know how to go to the chamber pot or what to do when she gets her period. She also then proceeds to ruin the 19th century woman's reputation. Stupid ass writer. One of the few books I've ever thrown away, overhand.

Posted by: BWeaves at December 23, 2008 9:49 AM

In all fairness, some of the sequels/prequels/satires aren't half bad. I point at Wicked and The Wind Done Gone here.

The problem is the same problem we find in regular fiction and movies. Character developement. If you're going to write a novel about a character (even a peripheral one) that the original author has already fleshed out--you can't completely change that character unless you give a damn good reason.

Otherwise you run the risk of publisher-sanctioned fanfiction which is essentially what this is anyway.

Posted by: Ava at December 23, 2008 9:52 AM

ACK. It's as if someone decided to publish Harry Potter fanfiction and sell it alongside J.K. Rowling's works at Barnes & Noble. NO. Write your own damn stories, assholes, or just leave your fanfic on the internet where god intended.

Posted by: Edith at December 23, 2008 10:01 AM

And I see Ava beat me to the "fanfic" punch... Somehow I missed that before posting.

Posted by: Edith at December 23, 2008 10:03 AM

"This is not a book to be set aside lightly. It is to be hurled, and with great force." Dorothy Parker

Posted by: BWeaves at December 23, 2008 10:16 AM

Sounds ghastly. Fabulous review my dear!

Posted by: Julie at December 23, 2008 10:40 AM

One the sequel/peripheral character front The Red Tent is pretty good.

Posted by: jack at December 23, 2008 10:56 AM

Yay for the scathing review of a book I fully expected to suck.

Now I must watch Christian Bale as Laurie propose marriage to Jo and then stop the DVD and pretend that they did get married and moved to London and were awesome.

Posted by: Alice at December 23, 2008 11:59 AM

I have to say that I read this book w/ not so much affection for "Little Women" as all the rest. My mother was obsessed w/ "LW" as a child and always tried to press it on me, so I suppose I rebelled by not paying as much attention. I do understand that if one felt fondly towards the original, "March" could be an horrific offense. However, please give Geraldine Brooks the benefit of the doubt. I absolutely loved her other two books, and I would recommend "The People of the Book" to anyone.

Posted by: MC at December 23, 2008 12:30 PM

Reading this passage was like hearing my parents have sex.

Thank you, thank you, Nicole, for this line alone. Now I'll never read this book because I think I would feel the same way.
OH and thank you, thank you for the Jo/Lawrie picture. Yuuuummmmmmmmy Christian at his best with his little crooked teeths and not-yet-pumped body and when they kiss by the fence and there's the trail of spit and okay, I'll stop now.

Posted by: jamiepants at December 23, 2008 2:01 PM

I have to agree with Ava, in that Wicked is a great example of a book that successfully jumped on the coattails of a classic and managed to be creative and build on the original.

Posted by: Lindsay at December 23, 2008 2:12 PM

Oh, and just in case you didn't know Nicole, there is ANOTHER shitty Gone with the Wind sequel/retelling, Rhett Butler's People. I refuse to read it on the grounds that I will commit multiple homicide.

Blakemas!, I own Rhett Butler's People - got it for Christmas last year - and opened it with some trepidation and then fell in love. The difference is that Donald McCaig studied GWTW so well that his Rhett is a natural fit. I read the former, then re-read the latter, and it was like tumblers falling into place. The end is a little painful, but most of Rhett Butler's People is very organic to the original story.

Holy tangent, Iron Man.

Posted by: Nicole at December 23, 2008 2:42 PM

Yuuuummmmmmmmy Christian at his best with his little crooked teeths and not-yet-pumped body and when they kiss by the fence and there's the trail of spit and okay, I'll stop now.

AHHHH ha ha ha ha! Whenever I watch that part I yell out, "Spit Exchange!"

Posted by: sonya at December 23, 2008 3:16 PM

I immediately thought of the travesty of Scarlett, but like you said, it's easy to disregard because it doesn't affect GWTW. And unlike Nicole, I'm scared of Rhett Butler's People. Rhett Butler being mysterious is what makes him so intriguing.

Posted by: kelsy at December 23, 2008 8:59 PM

Ahab's Wife wasn't bad. Probably because she was only mentioned in one sentence of Moby Dick. Anyway I didn't hate it.

Posted by: Az at December 23, 2008 9:58 PM

Thank you, I hated this book. It won the 2006 Pulitzer!

Posted by: Emily at December 24, 2008 1:57 PM