Literary Fiction by People of Color discussion

Tomorrow Is August 1 and the beginning of our discussion of our August discussion book, Silver Sparrow by author and LFPC group member Tayari Jones. We've had a few discussions of books by group members before - Carleen Brice, Tananarive Due and Eugenia Kim come to mind right away. Sometimes the authors make a few comments and sometimes they prefer to stay out of the discussion. We'll see which option Tayari chooses! Our discussion will be led this time by Columbus.

I know that we have mentioned several reviews and interviews about Silver Sparrow already. Here's the NPR link:

http://www.npr.org/2011/05/19/1364660...

Here's the book review from the Washington Post:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/enterta...

And here's the link to Tayari Jones' website and blog, with biographical info as well as other information and some great blog posts:

http://www.tayarijones.com/about/

Happy reading!

Before delving directly into the meat of the book. I'll start off the August discussion asking 2 multi-part questions to Tayari Jones  new novel, Silver Sparrow:

1. What other books have you read by Tayari Jones? What do you think of her writing style? Where do you place her young career in the pantheon of young writers?

2.Did you like the fact that she split the book in half with the 2 separate narrators? Did this style work for you?

Let the conversation begin!

I have read Silver Sparrow and Leaving Atlanta. The Untelling is on my "to be read" shelf. She is a master at character development in my opinion.
I was pleasantly surprised that the book had 2 narrators. It provided the perfect balance and made the story well-rounded.

I just started reading Silver Sparrow yesterday. This is the first I'm reading by Tayari Jones.

I hope I can keep up with the discussion.

this is also my first Jones reading. I thought the two sections worked particularly well given the situation. finished reading it 2 days ago.

I just started this book last night (and just joined the group today!).

So far, I am about 10% through the book. I am enjoying the writing style, it flows nicely.

This is my first book by the author.

I finished in July. I loved Silver Sparrow. I have read other dual narrative stories but Jones does it well and the transition back and forth was never dull. Her narrative is crisp and flows. The subject matter of bigamy for Jones to tackle deserves a lot of kudos. I hope others enjoyed it as much as I did. I think Jones work is brilliant.

I cant wait to discuss the concept of "Silver Girls".

I read Leaving Atlanta, and thought that was very well done. Silver Sparrow was ok, I think holding the secret until the final pages was unnecessary and the dual narratives was interesting, but I would have liked her to use both narrators throughout and further explore how they could have worked out their situation.

I have read all three of Tayari Jones' novels and I have been very impressed by all 3. Several years ago, I began reading her blog as well, first looking for information about new books by African American authors but becoming a regular blog reader because she takes such care with everything she writes and tackles interesting topics. I have also heard her read from her books several times. I heard a reading from the beginning pages of what eventually became "Silver Sparrow" a few years ago here in Atlanta, so I was thrilled when she completed the book and it was published. I loved all 3 books, but I think that "Silver Sparrow" is her best.

Since I live in SW Atlanta where her novels are set, her beautiful depiction of places in Atlanta that I know very well is an additional plus for me, but I think that I would love her books no matter where I lived.

Welcome to LFPC, Renee!  Typically, the first couple of days we discuss general topics about the author, any prior work she or he may have written, and the bare basics of the book. This allows those just starting the book to share in the conversation whenever possible. So, for all those just starting or mid-way thru, please don't hesitate to jump in between your reading.

This is my first time reading Tayari Jones as well. I've heard really great things about her other books and was told by friends this was a "must read." Some periodicals and other media have even dubbed her the next Toni Morrison or bestowed other lofty titles on her writing. Do you feel this is inevitable for any fairly new writer of color and just expected, or, unfairly given to any writer since Morrison sets a pretty high bar?

I read this book in June. This was my first time reading a book by Tayari Jones but I now plan to read her other two offerings. I like her writing style and very much enjoyed Silver Sparrow. I love her vivid descriptions and how she "sets the scene."

I think the dual narratives worked well for this book, although as someone commented, I would have liked more "back and forth" between the two narratives.

I can't wait to discuss this book in more detail later this month.

I am very excitedly reading Silver Sparrow, as it's the first book on my new e-reader!

I have just started the second narrative and will probably finish the book today or tomorrow.

I have not read or heard of Tayari Jones before. I'm really enjoying her use of language, especially the way she uses diction to establish & develop characters.

Mistinguettes wrote: "I am very excitedly reading Silver Sparrow, as it's the first book on my new e-reader!

I have just started the second narrative and will probably finish the book today or tomorrow.

I have not r..." which e-reader did you get, may I ask

Andre wrote: which e-reader did you get, may I ask


Not to usurp Mistinguettes, but in the Unburnable thread she mentions she got a Nook as have I. I hate to always be the dissenting voice but even though I've had a Nook since christmas I am still not sold. Even though I freed myself from lugging 10 books on an overseas trip, the battery life is short enough that it quit before the 16 hour plane ride was over,leaving me with no thing to read...not a problem with print, and it takes all night to charge ( I heard this is not the case with Kindle), you turn it off for take off and landing, its web browsing is laughable compared to my iPhone and uploading library books is tedious. An ereader is a distant second choice for me, nook in particular.

Now to the more heretical...everyone seems to be falling over themselves for this book...I started it 2 days ago and am going though it like a hot knife through butter. I'll be done tomorrow and while a dialogue heavy story is breezy and enjoyable it hardly reaches the level of greatness I look for in books of new ideas, themes, and literature. More like a Hallmark movie than a Tony Morrison manuscript. But some have hinted at a devastating twist at the end...I'm waiting.

I'm anxious to hear what it is that is resonating so strongly with the readers that love it so..I actually want to join the chorus..

William, you should have got the Kindle, battery is good for days with no charge...... On another note, I join you as a dissenter. I wrote in my review that I don't understand all the fuss about this book. The Toni comparisons are laughable, so I like you, am eagerly awaiting for explanations as to why some have assigned greatness to this novel.

i like my nook. and it definitely doesn't take me all night to recharge it! more like 1-2 hours? i haven't tested how many hours of continuous reading it lasts, though.

So far, I've read this book on my phone (my eyes!) while waiting for the camp bus to drop my son off (I found about the selection too late to get the actual book). i plan to continue with Kindle for PC through the rest of the read.

I have to say, at this point, I agree with William and Andre. However, during my initial read of Wench, I wasn't too happy with it but after finishing it, I found it had a quiet power that snuck up on me. I'm hoping it'll be similar with Silver Sparrow...

Oh and this is my first time reading Tayari Jones.

Columbus wrote: "Some periodicals and other media have even dubbed her the next Toni Morrison or bestowed other lofty titles on her writing. Do you feel this is inevitable for any fairly new writer of color and just expected, or, unfairly given to any writer since Morrison sets a pretty high bar? "

Boy, do I hate it when people make those kinds of comparisons! Every writer has his or her own voice. What do the works of Jones and Morrison have in common other than both women are African American and both can write? We don't need "the next Toni Morrison"; we need a wide variety of excellent literary fiction by people of color.

For me, Jones' gifts, in addition to beautifully written prose, are character and voice. She also does a beautiful job of depicting the settings of her books, but that may be clearer to me because I live in SW Atlanta where her books are set. Bill, don't look for some surprise twist - that's not how she writes. Her characters are very real, complex, and recognizable to me, and she lets them play out the consequences of their actions without any literary tricks. I loved the two voices of the book; it would have been a much less interesting book to me with only one.

Hello everyone. New to the group, new to Tayari Jones. I certainly wouldn't compare this novel to Toni Morrison, but it was an enjoyable read. Started on the 2nd and just finished about 20 minutes ago. Quiet Power is a good way to describe her writing, Tichaona. There were some things I read that resonated with me, and I loved the way she described things: events, expressions, places, feelings. This is the second novel I've read in the past few weeks that had a very unexpected ending. I guess I just watch too many movies where at the end of it all everything gets wrapped up all pretty in a cute little bow.

I did love the two parts of the book, it was interesting to see both sides, although I do think Chaurisse could have been fleshed out a bit more.

Hello, I am fairly new to the group as well. This is my first Tayari Jones. I have to agree that while the book was interesting, I am slightly mystified by the amount of praise it has gotten. But different opinions on books is what makes conversation about them stimulating.

I have to agree with Andre regarding how this book felt like a Lifetime movie, but in print. I think it read like a Lifetime movie for me because it seemed that most of the characters were not developed enough, especially Chaurisse. Who were these people? What were their motivations? Why bigamy? Do people think these questions were sufficiently explained?

I just had so many questions when I finished the book that it inhibited my enjoyment of it.

I certainly enjoyed reading the novel, but I wasn't exactly blown away either. Still, it's worth reading and I was glad to have picked it up. Plus, I was reading while visiting family in the Atlanta area, so that added a bit to my fun.

Well, I must say I'm simply fascinated by some of the responses thus far. I guess I was expecting a groundswell of support for this novel - to put it in political parlance; a coronation by the group. But, as Taida said in an earlier posting, "... different opinions on books is what makes conversation about them stimulating."

William said: "while a dialogue heavy story is breezy and enjoyable it hardly reaches the level of greatness I look for in books of new ideas, themes, and literature...." it raises an interesting question or questions? Is Silver Sparrow not literature? I ask this question because the book is garnering notice in some circles that's usually reserved for more of the  literary set. Does the social issue(s) explored in the book minus the metaphors, inferences and such reduce it to just commercial or genre fiction? And of course we know generally literary works don't sell  well so this couldn't possibly fit in that category. Just something to ponder... Would like to get on to the book itself since many of you have now completed or on the verge of completing the book.

I'm a sucker for opening lines in books and I was smitten with this one. Simple, but yet so strong and straight to the point.  "My Father, James Witherspoon, is a bigamist." Which brings us to the taboo subject of bigamy, a practice I understand that is more common than we realize.  Someone earlier asked, why bigamy? I think back to two other books that brought up sensitive issues in the African-American community- Walter Mosely's The Last Days of Ptolemy Grey and Bebe Moore Campbell's 72 Hour Hold - on the topic of mental illness. How do you think Jones handled the topic of bigamy in the book?

I have to disagree strongly with the "Lifetime movie" comments. I have actually watched quite a few Lifetime movies and none of them, even the very good ones, have the depth that the characters in this book have. I wonder if there is an assumption that books that focus on character are somehow less literary.

One of the things that fascinated me about Jones' approach to bigamy in this book was that James was not the usual idea of a bigamist. In a Lifetime movie or a lesser novel, the bigamist would be a handsome, charismatic figure who dazzled women into the relationship. He was a regular guy - he even had a stutter - who made truly bad decisions and then proceeded to make them even worse. I am curious - does anyone here know people in this kind of situation? Because I have, both people who were openly bigamists and the children of secret bigamists like those presented here. I think that by making James an ordinary guy who created a terrible situation for his families, the story became much more accessible. James was not a demon, just a very flawed man.

First - Go with a Kindle for those of you wondering. My hubby has a Nook and I have a Kindle. Mine far surpasses his in performance. The battery lasts a very, very long time.

Now, for the book: I liked this book, almost loved it at some points. I too was a little disturbed though by the comparisons to Toni Morrison. I admit (as I say in my review) to having a love/hate relationship with Ms. Morrison. I want to love her writing and I want to get her deeper meaning, but I fear I miss it more often that not. But, that is not to say I don't like her writing. I slogged through Beloved, but made quick work of The Bluest Eye.

I think what we have here, with Silver Sparrow, is the writing of someone that is not interested in too much exploring, too much psychoanalyzation (sp) of her characters. Each character, although not fully fleshed (Chaurisse), has a set of flaws that are just there. No apology for them. No blame on someone else for them. They just exist. And these people live their lives according to their conscious or unconscious decisions / mistakes. Its like watching a train go by. No wondering where it came from or where it's going, but just watching it carry on.

I found James to at first be a man in tough situation of his own making, but at the book progressed, I found him to be weak. A weak man, nothing worth carrying on for so many years over, and I think I truly started to hate him at some point. And, so, what is our message? Is it that women must keep a man, any man, whether he be good or bad? Is this how Gwen felt? That she must keep what she has, because it is all she will get?

And, then, what about at the end, the universal theme of Laverne vs Gwen. Oh yeah, Vernie would not about to let Gwen have her man! Forget the James is basically a weasel. And, so we see, looking from the outside, that these women turn it against each other, and this weak man gets to keep at least one half of his family.

I found the ending to be quite powerful. That we clearly see here Chaurisse ended up, but it is left open a bit about Dana. We do know though, that although she did not carry on the same dysfunction as her own mother, she did create her own in her adult relationship. And, so again, what does that say to us?

it seems clear the characters, for the most part, and apparently the author see bigamy as superior to single parent home. It was interesting to see the novel start off with a description of local folks practicing polygamy, and to me it would seem that the author was making a case to portray bigamy as an extension of that practice. It was interesting that the author was taking such pains to put everything into a context that made this all seem part of a community norm.

I wouldn't call this a Hallmark movie though. I just wouldn't say it had a keen edge to it.

I don't think that either woman (and certainly not the author) saw bigamy as preferable to a single family home. I think that each of them saw herself as the REAL wife. Gwen constantly pointed out to her daughter how they were actually superior to Chaurisse and her mother, and of course, poor Laverne was entirely in the dark about the second family. Gwen held on to her paperwork from her illegal marriage for dear life - it was the one thing, for her, that gave her life choices validity.

Rather than seeing bigamy as a preferable choice, I think that the author showed what a terrible price the daughters paid for their parents' choices. The image that haunts me from this book is Dana's constant fear of exposing her father's secret. She can't stay away from Chaurisse, both because of her need to understand what it was like to be the "real" daughter and because the community in which they all live is a closely knit one. But each time a situation develops in which she could be exposed, she completely panics. Her father had told her that she was a secret at a very early age and she lived within those constraints in fear of bringing down the house of cards created by James. It broke my heart.

I saw also that each one wanted to be James real wife and I felt for them and felt a connection even though I couldn't relate to the practice of bigamy.

I didnt quite see what drew these women to him with the description of his "Coke bottle glass". What was it? I had them growing up. It did not make me anything remotely attractive.

I too felt for the girls and couldn't imagine have to live with secrets and feeling like you were a secret.

Just to bring some clarity, the "Lifetime Movie" comments are not mine. I don't watch much tv. Columbus, you raised the question is Silver Sparrow literature. I think that would depend very much on how one defines literature. There certainly is not a universal definition.

I didn't see any depth to the story, and the ending borders on "street literature." Where is the complexity? Why is Dana compelled to keep this secret? She always seemed to get the short end of the stick. Does anyone belief that a young lady who felt slighted would have such discipline? And if she does, is it not the job of the author to make us feel that? To lock yourself in a gas station bathroom, to maintain a secret, really? Would anyone here suggest to their daughter that is correct and sensible behavior?

Correct and sensible? Of course not! It was an emotional reaction entirely. She panicked. Her father was coming, she had no business anywhere near the "real" family, and she was in the middle of Nowhere, GA! I don't think that keeping the secret was a case of discipline - this was her Daddy and this was the way that she had been raised to behave. She's a kid - she has no idea what will happen to her world if she violates the basic conditions of her life.

I'm not sure why you call the ending "street literature", Andre. Could you clarify?

Andre wrote: "Just to bring some clarity, the "Lifetime Movie" comments are not mine. I don't watch much tv. Columbus, you raised the question is Silver Sparrow literature. I think that would depend very much o..."

I rather found it believable that a child can be conditioned to keep such a secret and to absolutely fear the fallout that can happen if such a secret were revealed. Dana was told from as young as she can remember that she is the secret and she must remember to keep her dad a secret. I think many children, given the correct circumstances and very nature of the child, can definitely keep such a secret and rebellion, while it may cross the mind, is not ever a true option for them. Just ask children that are victims of trauma. Why do some speak out right away and others keep it deep within for years?

It seemed that everyone in the novel had intense loyalty, Gwen, Dana, Raleigh, to James but James did almost nothing to deserve it. Sure he showed up every Wednesday for dinner and paid most of Dana's education bills but even the coat he gave her turned out to be a lie. And Dana was a headstrong and no nonsense character so I have to agree with Andre that the gas station scene seemed to me to be a false note. Dana had nothing at that point to lose by coming clean. She was through with the duplicity forced upon her yet she crumbled like a cheap suit at the thought of James finding out she was friends with Chaurisse. Most teens rebel against their parents and certainly one would expect a teen like Dana to rebel against a part time parent like James. But instead she suffers the indignity of being holed up in a disgusting gas station bathroom and protects his secret bigamy. And Raleigh! He loves Gwen! But he also would rather protect James than do what he can to win her?

But don't get me wrong..I'm not hating on this book. I would recommend it to anyone looking for an intelligent well written character and dialogue driven story.

Mina, I agree the decision was an emotional one, but that feeling doesn't get conveyed to the reader effectively. I was thinking that man, this is crazy, when did she become so fearful?

Yes, Renee, it was stenciled in her brain to keep the secret, and you are absolutely right about children holding things for years, a point that I overlooked.

Mina and Renee can you say unequivocally, that you really FELT, the pain, fear or whatever was driving her behavior. At that point in the book (the highway bathroom), shouldn't it have been clear (depth of character) to the reader that Dana would do anything to maintain the secret? If you were surprised by her actions, like I was, then evidently the writing is inadequate.

Mina, I can clarify my comments about the ending, but should I do that now, don't want to spoil it for others who may still be reading.

Right on William, a "false note" well put. I also am not hating, just don't think this novel rises to the level of greatness.

I can unequivocally say that I felt her fear and panic in my gut, without a doubt. I knew from the time that she drew the family picture as a child with the whole family and was told that she was the secret that this was an unbreakable rule to maintain the delicate balance of her family. That scene absolutely killed me. Every maternal bone in my body wanted to protect her.

I don't think Silver Sparrow is anything like a lifetime movie. The characters in Silver Sparrow are far more complex and believable than most of what's on television. While I agree that Chaurisse's character could have been fleshed out a bit more, I still found it a very strong and well-written story.

I agree with Mina, I hate comparisons to Toni Morrison. Whether you like Morrison or not, she has a style of her own, and it's not one easily replicated. I don't think the author is attempting to do that and I'm not sure why critics are drawing such a comparison.

I think it was asked why James? Why bigamy? To that I ask, why not? Is James really an unlikely character? Is bigamy such an unreasonable concept for this story? Or, do we have preconceived notions about bigamy and it's practioners? Why do any of us choose the people we've chosen to have in our lives, romantic or platonic? Why do people cheat?

I disagree with the comment about the author seeing bigamy as preferable to single parent homes. I don't think that the author is making that statement at all. In fact, I think it's left up to the reader to make up their own mind as to what they think about it. The story is less about bigamy itself and more about how complicated the characters lives are because of it.

I also disagree with comment that the ending borders on street lit. If Silver Sparrow were anything like street lit, James would not have been able to move on choosing one family over the other. It would have been unbelievably messy, overly-dramatic, violent even.

To the question of complexity, it exists in the decisions that all of the characters make from the beginning.

I think Dana is compelled to keep the secret because she loved her parents and because the secret allowed her to exist in her world and anonymously enter Chaurisse's world. She may have been slighted more times than a few, but what you see as discipline, I think is a tiny bit of power--knowledge. Dana was warned to stay away from Chaurisse. However, she went from stalking, to approaching to befriending Chaurisse. She waved that knowledge in the face of the secret. Her actions at the gas station, odd as they may have been, were absolutely correct and sensible even for someone who was rocking the boat, but clearly wasn't ready to tip it over.

The charm of Silver Sparrow is that it isn't forcing you to take a side. It isn't asking you to understand why the characters make the choices that they make. It isn't even asking you to like any of the characters. It simply presents you with a narrative that isn't neat because relationships aren't neat, and they're further complicated by our flaws, weaknesses and decisions.

Bill. you say that she was through with the duplicity, but I don't think that she was. She was angry, but she was also afraid. She panicked every time there was a possibility of being found out. She acted out in other ways, she expressed her anger to James, she was drawn to Chaurisse, but she spent her life looking over her shoulder to be sure that she wasn't violating the secret. Her mother took her on spying missions but never let the other family see. If your life has been built on that big a lie, you would have to be afraid of what would happen when the truth came out. If you are the one who is the secret child, you are standing on very shaky ground.

I didn't see Silver Sparrow as a story "about" bigamy at all. I read it as a story questioning some fundamental cultural institutions that black folk don't much write about, including: The Good Wife, Doing The Right Thing By That Girl You Got Pregnant, Post-Black Power Good Hair, and Outside Family.

There is more to this novel than bildungsroman. There is something tragic, almost Greek, in Jones' treatment of knowing, not knowing and the inevitability of coming-to-know. This is particularly poignant in the development of Chaurisse's voice in section II. It feels like we may have overlooked this aspect of the narrative in part because the heroines are female.

And this is a very female story. When Laverne asks her new husband "James, was I raped?", that simple line speaks a heartbreak that is particularly feminine, and timeless. The dressing of Miss Bunny's body is such an intimate, and historically female, experience. Much of the narrative describes men as witnesses to the real actors: Dana, Chaurisse, Laverne, Gwendolyn.

I thought that bigamy was an interesting and contemporary place to begin this story, given that some black women are having open discussions about seeing non-monogamous relationships as their only option for any relationship with black men (most recently, Jill Scott on Twitter). But I think that Jones used bigamy - the illegal wedding to two spouses at the same time -- as a plot device to explore how closely wedded are many conditions in black women's lives that we talk about as opposites: wife versus Other Woman, legitimate versus illegitimate desires, the ties of blood versus the ties of affiliation.

William, I have a Nook SimpleTouch, and find that if I only turn on the wireless when I actually need it, my battery life is quite fine. I'm guessing it probably doesn't hold the same primary charm for you as it does for me -- it fits perfectly into my handbag!

Oh yes, and as a Seven Sisters alumna, I loved the characterization of Spelman as the eighth "step sister"!

Wholehearted agreement, Mistinguette and Maegen.

Mistinguettes wrote: "I didn't see Silver Sparrow as a story "about" bigamy at all. I read it as a story questioning some fundamental cultural institutions that black folk don't much write about, including: The Good Wif..."

I certainly agree with two of your posits...that Gwen asking James if she was raped was straight to the heart arresting and poignant. And that the central figures are all female. James actually comes off as somewhat expendable. But to describe the female leads as heroines? Whats heroic about living your life in the shadow of a controlling man? one that determines your entire course of action on a daily basis and even determining in Gwens case who you can love and your child's future? In Lavernes case after being cuckolded for the greater part of your life you still think the perpetrator is your best option? I don't see the heroism.
I don't think that we overlook Chaurisse I just think that after being invested in the very interesting characterization of Dana that Chuarisse is not quite so interesting. It doesn't help that she is also oblivious to the obvious.

IMHO, these characters are heroic, in the classical sense. They meet the tests of sacrifice for a cultural ideal, a moral flaw that is both their undoing and strength , a moment of profound recognition,and providing the reader with new insight into the motivations of others.

Like Homer's Hector, Gwendolyn and Laverne are women who sacrifice their entire lives for what they consider "greater good": Gwendolyn,the protection of her family; Laverne, the exemplar of the dutiful Good Wife and helpmeet in a time and place where such examples were becoming rare. Both bring a certain hubris to the way they occupy these roles, but to live your values in circumstances controlled by others is the very definition of a hero. And, like Hector, classical heroes are often defeated and subject to humiliation: heroism is defined by commitment, not triumph.

Remember that this story takes place in a time when divorce was hard for women to obtain; "illegitimate" was still a checkbox at the top of the birth certificate appearing before "name"; smart, capable women still worked as domestics and clerks; "Will this get me lynched?" was a question grown folks regularly asked themselves; and women could not obtain credit on their own. Institutionalized sexism often meant that, for many women, a person who hurts them really *was* also their best option for economic and emotional survival. That's why there was a feminist movement happening the 1970s and 80s, when this books is set. Systemic oppression - sexism, racism and classism --really do determine who we can love, the course of our lives and the future of our children. These characters made decisions within this historical context, not ours.

To be heroic is to be flawed. Dana and and Chaurisse are deeply injured and flawed young women. Dana's flaw is a covetousness that arises from the wound of being unwanted; Chaurisse's is her unawareness of what is happening around her, carefully cultivated by her parents. The climax of the novel happens when each of the characters are forced to recognize who they are, and how their flaws have contributed to the circumstance in which they find themselves. (OK, I'm gonna try to make this point without spoilers ) Dana's desire to occupy or consume Chaurisse's place in life, and Chaurisse's blindness to the motivations of others, leads the characters to meet in the gas-station climax.

I thought Chaurisee's narrative was the only one where real recognition - as in anagnorisis- occurs, so I thought it was the most significant. I experienced the uncle's obsession with seeing through photography as an excellent foil to Laverne and Chaurisse's unwillingness to see, and delighted in the pivotal role his photo of Miss Bunny took on.

And, it a meta way, the treatment of the quotidian lives - with their oft unacknowledged details - of black women as classical tragedy worked for me because our lives are significant, and offer opportunities for personal insight and catharsis to anyone who listens deeply and with compassion to the tale.

I haven't finished the book yet, and I am so glad nobody has really spoiled the ending for me.

I am now into the "fleshing out" of Chaurisse. Chaurisse is the wanna-be. She wants to be a "silver" girl, and sees Dana as the ultimate silver girl. Dana wants to be the girl who lives in a real house with a "real" family.

Dana has to keep the secret for fear of losing her piece of a Daddy. "Better to have a piece of a man than no man at all" is the lesson from Gwen as well as from Laverne.

I'm waiting to read further into what motivates all four women to stay in this arrangement.

On a personal note, my second (current) husband whom I married in my 50's has a brother who was in such an arrangement. They didn't call it bigamy. They called it an "outside family." The children are now in their 30's and 40's with the inside children more welcoming of the outside child than the reverse.

This novel doesn't maintain emotional truth and I think some are relating to the story in a personal way, and that colors their objectivity. To use a simple example, if you have ever had a car accident, every time you read about a car accident you may get emotional, but it's not the writing that makes it so, it's relating to the experience. I see that happening in many of the comments here.

The motivations of the main characters are never explained or even hinted at by use of clever language. That leaves the reader with constant questions and few answers.

The motivations of the characters were very clear to me, Andre. Please don't assume that we are not seeing the book correctly. It is equally likely that your own personal experiences stand in the way of your connection with this book. All viewpoints should be respected here.

The only thing that I did assume Mina was your last sentence. Apparently, that is not the case. In the future I will only comment on books that I share in your opinion, that should make things flow easier.

I think that to say we all relate to the story in a personal way, thereby influencing our objectivity is not an insult at all. This isn't a court of law - this is a literary piece of art. All things, tv, books, magazines, plays, stories, are viewed within the contexts of our minds and our souls. We are each touched in a different way and cannot help but process something in relation to how we have thus far experienced the world and our lives. To imply that one's opinion may be inferior because it was derived by it's relation to personal feelings or experiences in quite short sighted. I would ask anyone, what pleasure in reading (or seeing movies, plays, etc) can be found, if one were not allowed to have some emotional (or lack of) connection to a book?

Andre, your opinions are very welcome. I am just encouraging you to avoid telling us that our objectivity is somehow flawed. That's not about the book; that's analyzing us and the validity of our opinions. If we stick to the book, everything is good. There is never universal agreement on any book we've read - last month's book was extremely controversial. But let's analyze the book, not each other. I certainly agree with Renee - what we bring to any book determines how much we enjoy the book. Our differences are what make the discussions interesting.

Ooooh! Having a hard time keeping up with you guys!

One of the issues I had with this book, was that we weren't able to know for sure Gwen's reason for outing herself at Laverne's salon. I assumed it was because James was going to leave Dana at the gas station, once again in Gwen's mind, choosing his "first family" over her and Dana. But since Jones' doesn't really explore this, we can only assume this is the reason why after all of this time, after years and years and years, she finally decides that this is the straw that broke the camel's back so to speak. We also don't know WHY she chose the salon as opposed to say meeting her in a public place.

Also I found it incredibly interesting that both women at one point were wishing that Raleigh was the man they met first instead of James.

I just finished reading. I wouldn't call the ending a surprise, rather a disappointment. I understand Laverne's motivation, but not James'.

And as others have already said, there is little similarity to the writing of Toni Morrison.

It's definitely a thought-provoking story that will stay with me forever. I give it four stars.

Cammie, I'm glad you brought that scene up. It is almost operatic in its description!

SPOILER ALERT
I think that we get lots of clues about why this happens along the way. It's really anti-climactic after Chaurisse's understanding of who the people are in her life, and how they are related to her. But before we arrive at this scene, Laverne is shown to be increasingly unstable - her persistent wheedling questions after Dana is recognized by her grandfather but still rejects her; her stealing the photo of Miss Bunny from the contest. So this is no surprise.

But I do love that the face-off happens when Laverne is literally clothed in her denial: she is dressed as the Good Wife, parading before others in her community. It's a bizarre symbolic reenactment of the false life she has been trying to live up to for decades. And the patrons in the Pink Fox are like a pressed-and-curled Greek chorus; through them we see that Laverne is the only person in town who doesn't know who Gwen and Dana are, even as they (literally) applaud Laverne for insisting on playing the role of the Good Wife, even when that role is patently hollow.

As for why Gwen came to the Pink Fox: she came to deliver some high drama, not some news. In her unhinged state, I think she wanted public witness to balance a lifetime of private shame. She needed to demonstrate that she was real - a real wife, with real hair, and really was the woman chosen by James. The question left unanswered is, did she get what she came for?