21st Century Literature discussion

Spoilers Through Book 3 ONLY

The thread below is open for us to discuss Books 2-3 , and anything leading up to them.

I had a flash of memory that explains the apparent vividness of the story for me. Decades ago, I spent a week in a resort hotel without my wife, and had a chance to move from participant to observer. The story reignites my emotional tone of that time.

Also, a line echoed a thread in another novel I just read, A Tale for the Time Being, that features the Zen concepts of a "time being" carrying the past into now. On page 225 (chapter "1924 Anonymity"), Towles' Count "now understood his place in the passage of time."

Oh what an interesting thing for the Count to think. I missed that!

Yes, traveling alone is quite different than traveling with someone.

Mark wrote: "Towles' Count "now understood his place in the passage of time."..."

Thanks for pointing that line out Mark, that is a very interesting line, and a very interesting part in the story, thinking of how the past was being erased in Russia in that era.

I do like how the Count not only is an observer but with time he has become an active member of the Metropol and his acquaintances have become more than that. I specially have enjoyed the "Triumvirate"

I agree Jessica about the Count being an observer and more active as things have progressed.

I've had to slow down reading because of work obligations and such, but it is okay with me because I'm savoring each page of this book. I'm really enjoying it and loving the author's style of writing.

The Count's view of great changes bears some mention.On P543 (my edition) of Chapter "1952 - America," the Count is discussing the uncertainty in the event of Stalin's death, predicting "Depending on who ends up in charge, the doors of the city could either be flung open to the world, or slammed shut from the inside."
In the next section of the chapter, he has an extensive discussion with Anna of the alternatives, referring to openness at "the former," and inward retreat from the world as "the latter." Anna characterizes that Russian retreat by pointing to the Kremlin as a "fortress a thousand years old and four hundred miles from sea. Physically speaking, its walls are no longer high enough to fend off attack; and yet, they still cast a shadow across the entire country."
Across the world today, many countries are adopting retreat from the world.

A careful accounting of days allows the isolated to note that another year of hardship has been serviced; bested. Whether they have found the strength to persevere through a tireless determination or some fool hardy optimism, those 365 hatch marks stand as proof of their indomitability (109-110).

It’s the one year anniversary since the Count’s imprisonment on 6.21.22, and while he may seem of sound mind, I cannot discount the fact that he appears to show symptoms of cabin fever after reading the above description of how he accounts for the days spent in his imprisonment thus far.

Something else that has come to mind is regardless of the Count’s circumstances, he’s still very much in step with the outside world due to the comings and goings of the hotel guests (to an extent), but also the presence of Mishka. Through Mishka, the artist, the poet, Towles alludes to how much more difficult it will become for people like him to express themselves through their art, when the two were discussing the influence of haiku poetry on present day Russian authors. The parallel becomes even clearer between haiku shaping Russian poetry and what we know as modern day readers, the dominance of the Bolsheviks shaping a society without artistic freedom. It also brings to light a more human side to the Count, their discussion revealing a slight stirring of jealousy. While both men are prisoners, in their own right, the Count lacks the ability to freely: move about Moscow/Russia, love and pursue a woman, forge and nurture other relationships of his own making, in the manner Mishka does.

Addendum-Adieu
Petulant Actress- Meh. to both her petulance and being infuriated by the Count hanging up her blouse. I’m not finding any of these female characters interesting enough, in the least bit, to keep my attention. I did enjoy how Anna was a step ahead of the Count during the course of their evening together, however.

While it was entertaining to read about the Count finding himself caught off-guard by Anna’s spirit and confidence, it was also sad to read about him realizing how he lacks those very characteristics as a prisoner in the Metropol. Leaving her room like a ghost in the night, he is enveloped in cold and empty feelings about his life, suddenly. I didn’t think the Count’s current state of mind would lead him to taking his own life until a little later in the wine cellar with Andrey. Towles writes

…the Count careful took a bottle from among the thousands. Holding it up with a wistful smile, he ran his thumb over the insignia of the two crossed keys that was embossed on the glass.

On the twenty-second of June 1926-the tenth anniversary of Helena’s death-Count Alexander Illyich Rostov would drink to his sister’s memory. Then he would shed this mortal coil, once and for all (145)

The culmination of events after his night with Anna: a walk of shame, one last visit to his prior abode in room 317, the brief and joyless interaction with Nina, everybody is on a forward progression except for him and it seems to be gutting him. Towles writes, the Count,

he believed, most especially, in the reshaping of destinies by the slightest change in the thermometer, his leanings had always been essentially meteorological…the inevitable influence of clement and inclement weathers,

which goes hand-in-hand with the course of events leading to his imminent decision, but also explains his deep-rooted guilt surrounding Helena’s death (146). While it appeared as if the Count would plummet to his death, the stars were aligned for Rostov, Abrams showing up on the roof and enticing him back to reality-and, what a call back to life it was with the taste of fresh honey on one’s lips?

I really enjoyed this chapter as Towles continues to build the trajectory of the Count’s story, revealing him to be a vulnerable man than a man shielded by his status and airs. I believe, we are in the guts of the plot line in these two books, both Towles and the Bolsheviks continuing to chisel away at this most astounding specimen of a man.

Book 3

1930-Absinthe
Well, it's been six years since tasting a memory eliciting honey, snapping the Count out of his reverie on the rooftop! This next breakfast scene sure did quickly lighten the reading mood. It warmed my heart to read Rostov relishing his breakfast, wanting to experience over, and over again.

Change was of the essence, both inside and outside of The Metropol Hotel; none of it lost on our Count who was now a member of the waitstaff at the Boyarsky, where the practice of having wine labels on bottles had returned. The latter even brought a wide smile to my face! Rostov appeared to be a lot lighter in step and happier than in the previous book. While his newfound outlook on life may be due in part to having purpose, I can’t help but think it was really attributed to the Count being a success because of who he was in that past life, and what it still affords him in the present. For example, Rostov was able to acquire saffron by special means and because of it, received praise and acclaim by Emile; due to his upbringing, he knew how to properly host social gatherings and created cohesive seating assignments, which factored into his success as a head waiter. He was a part of the working class, now, yet he still had a strong foothold into his past which continued to anchor him in it. While Count Rostov was clearly no vicious tiger, I continued to wonder at this point, if he would have to completely change his stripes to truly let go of his past and move on with his future. I’m hoping he does not have to conform, but Towles seems to be saying otherwise.

Oh, good grief! It’s the actress, again. I didn’t like her for him at this point, despite their evident animal magnetism. In Arachne’s Art , Towles used a heavy brushstroke plying the reader with the theme of fate; however, it was lost on me in this section, using Anna as the vehicle to drive it forward when describing the rekindled relationship with Rostov. Towles didn’t rein me into their relationship any further than knowing they had amazing sex, and belonging to the Confederacy of the Humbled. However, in Afternoon Assignment , the dynamics between the two changed, ritual and habit formed, and through this a genuine intimacy was revealed. Anna’s character was further developed in this section, she becoming a more relevant part of the narrative as both a woman with a message in a time of great upheaval, and also as somebody who continued to move forward under the very circumstances that held her back. I also liked the fact that her father was a peasant because it makes her current place in society as a film actress all the more admirable, considering her meager beginnings.

Towles’ inclusion of the Arion and Delphinus story in the narrative read to me to be a direct parallel to the Count’s own story, while Anna’s about the wealthy salesman with is own ships and three sons, related to her own life. Both stories gave me a sense of hope for the Count and Anna, respectively, a possible way out of this mess for him and more work for her?

In An Alliance , through Osip, it was further cemented how eradicating traditions of the aristocracy was such a mistake. While pretending as if it never existed in one’s own country, it didn’t benefit those needing to create alliances with other countries where the aristocracy continued to exist. In this sense, it’s also maddening to comprehend what the Bolsheviks did to their aristocracy; how they continued to strip and humiliate them, because of their status and airs; but, didn’t hesitate to use them for their own benefit in situations similar to Osip’s. I wasn’t sure where this alliance would lead, I just hoped the Count would be one step ahead in the pairing. Maybe Osip would be a decent man? Regardless, the narrative was getting exciting again with his addition.

Boy, this Bishop…Grrr. I loved the Absinthe section, it was here I fully felt the Count both purposeful and genuinely happy considering the circumstances; his relationship with Andrey and Emile being the major contributor to his fulfillment, a genuine friendship forged.

The unread letter written by Mishka continued to plague the narrative. Rostov unable to finish reading it at various times, but also the narrator making the reader privy to the more important aspect of the letter. The words in it were those spoken by Mayakovsky and nothing to do with Mishka’s affections for Katarina. Mishka had sent the letter because Mayakovsky had shot himself through the heart with a revolver. The stories within the story all appear to have direct ties to those telling them. The ominous note affixed to the letter Mishka sent Rostov, and he being a resistor, I couldn’t help but foresee a moment in the near future where he would no longer be able to dodge his fate at the hands of the Bolsheviks.

Addendum-Alighting
Walter Duranty, the lead correspondent for the NYT in Russia, denying the famine at the time, and winning the Pulitzer for his reporting of it; his wiki page states,

Years later, there were calls to revoke his Pulitzer. In 1990, The New York Times, which submitted his works for the prize in 1932, wrote that his later articles denying the famine constituted some of the worst reporting to appear in this newspaper…Ultimately, Sig Gissler, administrator of the Pulitzer Prize board, declined to revoke the award. In a press release of November 21, 2003, he stated that with regard to the 13 articles by Duranty from 1931 submitted for the award there was not clear and convincing evidence of deliberate deception, the relevant standard in this case.

The Bolsheviks were doing more harm to the very people they sought to help by exiling a million kuluks, the most capable farmers, leaving both urbanites and peasantry in a disastrous predicament. What’s even more deleterious to both Russia’s society and its history were the repercussions of this faulty approach, to righting a wrong, and its effects on the generations since. They never really did recover, did they? It’s curious isn’t it, all variables held constant, considering habitable and fertile areas of the country, the Russian GDP is barely larger than Illinois, Pennsylvania and Florida, as of 2018. The footnote on page 228 was excruciatingly devastating to read. There’s no reliable journalism, no personal mail, windows of passenger trains were blackened and when word finally escaped the country we have Duranty with his perfect words denying the fact…rumors of famine were grossly exaggerated and had probably originated with anti-Soviet propagandists.

Goodness, things do not look good for Nina as we find her on her way to Siberia, leaving her daughter with Rostov. Well, this was going to be an interesting adventure, no? If this novel, thus far, has been about searching for purpose, then maybe Sophia will be Rostov’s greatest purpose yet? I love how, like any new parent, Rostov too found the most difficult aspects of raising a child to being the most fulfilling. Sophia, as little as she was, was taking up a lot of room both physically and mentally for Rostov; but, it’s clear she’d already stolen his heart! Also, like a new parent, he had doubts about his ability to properly parent. The sections following with Sophia really warmed my heart. I liked that Rostov was able to focus, wholeheartedly, on somebody else other than himself, alleviating some of the mental festering he was prone to experiencing.

The switch from Sophia as a secondary character to Osip was a bit jolting. We shift from child play to serious world matters; yet, even though it is Osip sitting in front of the Count instead of Sophia, she was still very much present in the room- he can’t stop thinking about how her arrival had affected his life. I was surprised by how open the Count was with Osip, about Sophia living with him.

Really! Bread? It made sense considering the world created by the Bolsheviks, but removing a description of German bread because it could be seen as anti-Russian, or anti-Bolshevik because of the widespread famine; it’s difficult to fathom, yet not surprising at all. This, and Mishka’s own personal battle with the regulations placed on society, it was only a matter of time until he officially flipped his lid and paid for the consequences of doing so. In true Bolshevik style, if the people were unable to conform, then what else to do but expel them from society. Off to Siberia Mishka went, and with him, Nina had disappeared there too. Goodness.

This round-faced man that kept rearing his bald head in these Books, Anna, Sophia, the whole bit was the worst example of creativity in writing so far in “AGiM.” For lack of a better word, I found their possible connection to be ridiculous. Also, Sophia’s stay at the hotel under the all-seeing Bolshevik eyes and ears for another eight years, was disappointing in comparison to what Towles had described about living in the Metropol, in previous sections. Nope, I didn’t buy either of these aspects in the story. Moving on.

1946-Antics, Antithesis, An Accident

No refugees, unless of course, they serve the purpose of shielding the Muscovites from a German attack. Well, that sounds great!

Mishka’s arrival in an extremely weakened state, was a pleasant surprise, albeit the accompanying story of his life the past eight years. What could he possibly be working on that was not ready to be shared, that continued to give him purpose? Roles have been reversed, Mishka jealous of the Count this time, his imprisonment nothing like what Mishka endured in Siberia. After Mishka leaves, their conversation continues to linger on Rostov’s mind. I enjoyed reading about Mishka, Osip and Richard Vanderwhile's points of view about the purpose of a revolution. Mishka states that the Russians were great at destroying what they had created because of the power of the message; Osip, on the other hand made a case for the rise of Communism and how Russia had greatly benefited from it despite the hardships endured in comparison to when the aristocracy were the ruling class. The Count then asked at what cost must progress come, Osip responded

At the greatest cost! Do you think the achievements of the Americans-evied the world over-came without a cost? Just ask their African brothers. And do you think the engineers who designed their illustrious skyscrapers or built their highways hesitated for one moment to level the lovely little neighborhoods that stood in their way? I guarantee you, Alexander, they laid the dynamite and pushed the plungers themselves

(297). Richard’s thought on Mishka’s and Osip’s beliefs about the revolution was that they were missing a crucial component…

We don’t know how a man or his achievements will be perceived three generations from now, any more than we know what is great-great-grandchildren will be having for breakfast on a Tuesday in March. Because when Fate hands something down to posterity, it does so behind its back (302).

At this point, I find the idea of fate making its way through these pages to be a little heavy-handed. Did it really boil down to luck in the end?

Sophia’s accident was rather revealing of who Count Alexander Rostov had become, a loving, scared and doting father; he put his own life on the line, stepping out of the hotel after twenty years, for his daughter. It’s also important to note the relationship between Osip and the Count, they genuinely were friends-I didn’t think this possible in the beginning.

Mark wrote: "The Count's view of great changes bears some mention.On P543 (my edition) of Chapter "1952 - America," the Count is discussing the uncertainty in the event of Stalin's death, predicting "Depending ..."

this particular chapter is in Book 4, Mark.

Mark wrote: "I had a flash of memory that explains the apparent vividness of the story for me. Decades ago, I spent a week in a resort hotel without my wife, and had a chance to move from participant to observe..."

I think what Towles does really well is show the difference between what the Count acknowledges (his place in the passage of time) as being purposeful, versus what he actually puts into play by shedding himself from his past.

Jessica wrote: "Mark wrote: "Towles' Count "now understood his place in the passage of time."..."

Thanks for pointing that line out Mark, that is a very interesting line, and a very interesting part in the story,..."

thinking of how the past was being erased in Russia in that era.
Yes, the distinction made by Towles, that the Bolsheviks were able to erase the aristocracy's past, but they could not eliminate their experience.

I do like how the Count not only is an observer but with time he has become an active member of the Metropol and his acquaintances have become more than that.
the arc of his character was one of the best I have read. becoming an active part of his surroundings goes back to what I was saying in the previous post, putting acknowledgement into action.

Ami, I'm with you on the actress. She seems cartoonish. Towles' women are less convincing for me than his men. That was true for me in his New York novel too, unfortunately, since his main characters there were women.

Mark wrote: "Ami, I'm with you on the actress. She seems cartoonish. Towles' women are less convincing for me than his men. That was true for me in his New York novel too, unfortunately, since his main characte..."

Towles' women are less convincing for me than his men
I was wondering if it was me? I even thought, how could anybody else stand out with the Count in their presence. He’s too captivating, an enigmatic figure, 24/7. His pairing with Anna, a character who seeks out the light, as an actress, I sensed an imbalance between them. Rostov did not need to be center stage, he shined from within everywhere he went.

It’s a shame writing lackluster female characters is a norm for Towles, than the exception. I’ll keep this in mind and let you know, when I read “RoC.”

I agree with both of you, all the female characters in this book lack depth and aren't memorable which is a shame, considering the Count is such a great character.

Jessica wrote: "I agree with both of you, all the female characters in this book lack depth and aren't memorable which is a shame, considering the Count is such a great character."

I can’t even rate them from least to most noteworthy. LoL!

Thank you for the discussion of unexceptional female characters. I, also, thought it was just me since I cannot think of any serious criticisms of GiM and didn't realize I was carrying over baggage from RoC. I do feel that the Count's relationship with Nina, Marina, Anna and Sofia differed from his relationship with the members of the Triumvirate, Andrey and Emile but I didn't spend a lot of energy defining that difference.

Sarah wrote: "Thank you for the discussion of unexceptional female characters. I, also, thought it was just me since I cannot think of any serious criticisms of GiM and didn't realize I was carrying over baggage..."

I cannot think of any serious criticisms of GiM and didn't realize I was carrying over baggage from RoC.
I dislike that you experienced this, but I love that you had a revelation about carrying baggage from RoC-double-edged sword. It's funny how that happens sometimes, not realizing until some time later, or through another book that valid flaws do exist in certain writing approaches

I do feel that the Count's relationship with Nina, Marina, Anna and Sofia differed from his relationship with the members of the Triumvirate, Andrey and Emile but I didn't spend a lot of energy defining that difference.
Intimacy in its various forms, is what it came down to for me, Sarah. It's why I didn't think anything of it, as it pertained to the sexes-it's what I would expect. The women, relegated to roles of lover, ward (Nina), sister (Marina), or daughter (Sophie); and, the men are all on equal footing, or at least level up to it as friend/confidant/partners in crime. I would say, Anna's relationship with Rostov did deepen over time, from lovers to friends and lovers, no?

I had asked a question in the final thread about "RoC," it's M38, did I misread somewhere, or is there a commonality? I would ask it again in here, but I don't want to spoil it for anybody, if a spoiler exists at all. Thanks! :)