Books on the Nightstand discussion

Is anyone interested in reading a book together and posting some discussions here? There are several non-fiction books on my short list that I want to read, including:

- Unbroken: Laura Hillenbrand
- Seabiscuit: Laura Hillenbrand
- Into Thin Air: Jon Krakauer
- The Greater Journey, Americans in Paris: David McCullough
- In the Garden of Beasts: Erik Larson
- Into The Wild: Jon Krakauer
- The Emperor of All Maladies: Siddhartha Mukherjee

The next fiction I'd like to pick up is:
- The Intuitionist: Colson Whitehead

Is anyone interested in reading any of these together? If so, which one(s)? At what pace? Are there other books you'd rather read together? I just thought it would be fun to have an open and ongoing discussion and was hoping to read something with someone else. I'm flexible on the choice of book and the pace.

Post back to this thread if you're interested. Either way, happy reading!

I have In the Garden of Beasts on my Nook. It isn't currently in the next 10 books I am going to read, but maybe it could make it's way up there...

W. Joe wrote: "Is anyone interested in reading a book together and posting some discussions here? There are several non-fiction books on my short list that I want to read, including:

- Unbroken: Laura Hille..."

In the Garden of Beasts: Love, Terror, and an American Family in Hitler's Berlin is on my to-read pile as well ... I've read some of the others on your list (Unbroken, The Greater Journey, and The Emperor of All Maladies) and would love to discuss any of them.

I would be interested in joining in on whatever title is selected! All of the titles are on my radar, but if I had to choose, it would be one of the Hillenbrand titles or the Erik Larson book.

I'm always up for a good discussion. I have read or am interested in reading any of these titles so I have no preference. I would say with my other reading obligations I would need at about a month to get it read once it is selected.

Let's give it another day to see if any other suggestions come in, but it looks like there's the most interest in the Erik Larson book with about a month to read and discuss it. Sounds like fun! I'll post again in about a day and we'll get started.

I vote for Unbroken, as I bought it for my grandad as a present & now he's leant it back to me to read. I'm looking forward to it after hearing such good reviews! A month sounds good to me too.

Afraid I can't join you guys due to this toppling pile of books I need to read for work ... but I'm just thrilled that you are putting this together, W. Joe (may I call you W? Or do you prefer Joe?).

Let me know if I can help in any way!

I'm interested, although I have read both of the Krakauers, and while they are typically Krakauer (i.e., riveting), I would prefer not to re-read. I am currently listening to Unbroken on audio while I'm on the treadmill. Such is the state of my exercise regimen that I'm not too far into it so that would be a great choice for me. The remaining books suggested by Joe are great picks, and I share a desire to read them. So, other than choosing the Krakauers, I would like to be involved.

Ann wrote: "Afraid I can't join you guys due to this toppling pile of books I need to read for work ... but I'm just thrilled that you are putting this together, W. Joe (may I call you W? Or do you prefer Joe?..."

I'm looking forward to doing this together, and you can call me W or Joe...either is fine. Looks like we have some competing choices for the book, so let's vote (I'll abstain since they all sound good to me). Reply back with your final preference between the Larson (Beasts) and Hillebrand (Unbroken) titles, and we'll get started. It sounds like the pace will be about a month.

I would be game for either, but my vote is for Larson's Beasts. I'm excited - you've solved the problem of picking my next audio!

W. Joe wrote: "Ann wrote: "Afraid I can't join you guys due to this toppling pile of books I need to read for work ... but I'm just thrilled that you are putting this together, W. Joe (may I call you W? Or do you..."

Unbroken is my vote, and thank you for coming up with this idea :)

I yield to the group. Either really is fine with me.

Count me in. My preference is Larson's Beasts as I have read Unbroken but I loved Unbroken so I'm happy with either choice.

I am up for either. Just finished Larson book and like it. Would love to discuss. Thanks W. Joe.

I have read both so I will join in the conversations.Thanks for organizing this!

I'll cast my vote for Unbroken, but I'm excited about Beasts. I'll be happy either way - what a great condition to be in!

It looks like there is a little more interest in Erik Larson's In The Garden Of Beasts. Let's get started with that one, then maybe we can choose another when we're done.

We all read at different paces, but it looks like about a month might suit a lot of people who have responded in this thread. Given that, here are some potential milestones to hit as we discuss the book together over the next several weeks:

- Week 1: through chapter 10 - aug 20
- Week 2: through chapter 22 - aug 27
- Week 3: through chapter 38 - sep 3
- Week 4: through chapter 54 - sep 10
- Week 5: through the epilogue - sep 17

Also, I think it would be most fun if we keep the dialog active with few limitations throughout the discussion. I don't think we need a lot of rules other than to say it's OK to disagree. Healthy debate and disagreement can be fun and stimulating as long as we maintain dignity and respect for the opinions of others in our dialog.

Can anyone think of anything else that should be covered? If so, please say so.

Let's get going and start posting comments, questions, perspectives, etc. This particular book should be really good for that since it deals with so many controversial topics. Let's have fun with it, and maybe other readers will join us throughout the upcoming month.

Happy reading!

W. Joe wrote: "It looks like there is a little more interest in Erik Larson's In The Garden Of Beasts. Let's get started with that one, then maybe we can choose another when we're done."

Dnloading it onto my nook even as we type :-)

I suggest not revealing any spoilers in the comments?

Suzanne wrote: "I suggest not revealing any spoilers in the comments?"

I'm guessing that you are giving that suggestion to people who have already read the book or; read ahead? Otherwise, it's not much of a discussion, just a bit of light reviewing...

Tanya wrote: "Suzanne wrote: "I suggest not revealing any spoilers in the comments?"

I'm guessing that you are giving that suggestion to people who have already read the book or; read ahead? Otherwise, it's not..."

Yeah - probably. I don't know how many spoilers can be in a work of non-fiction but if the discussion is on part one, I wouldn't like to read a post about something that happened part two. Just my opinion.

In case anyone is in the processing of procuring, I got the audiobook version and I do not recommend it. You know the voiceover guy of 500 Days of Summer? It sounds like that guy reading history to you and it's just not that awesome - it takes me 10 minutes to get into the story. I'd recommend the print route.

That aside, so good so far!

Reading Progress: Through Chapter 8

I'm finding the degree to which there is almost institutionalized bigotry at the highest levels of American society during the early 30's appalling. I had no idea it was so pervasive within our own society at the highest levels of government. It is particularly striking given the education levels of the people perpetuating it and the self-proclaimed status and class that they wished to convey with their governmental positions and power. Of course, hindsight is always more clear, but I can't help but see that it's no wonder things with Hitler got so far out of hand. At least at this point in the book America did little to nothing to force his hand.

It is a sad revelation and may be an indication that we have learned very little from this. One can't help but put this lesson into context in the world of today and see similar signs of genocidal bigotry across the world. Maybe it's not yet on the same scale, but it's every bit as atrocious. The title of the book is starting to make more sense.

I wonder what the rest of you think...

Reading Progress: Through Chapter 9

It's amazing to see how flimsy the facade of civilized and polite society is set in front of the atrocities that are being committed to the Jewish population in Germany during the early 30's. One would have to deliberately turn a blind eye and make a concerted effort to not see it.

What do you think was driving the inhumanity? I have my own opinions, but I wonder what other people think...

Whew, this is a really fascinating yarn so far. A few thoughts up through mid-chapter 10:

1) I'm reading The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich right now, as well, and between the two, the one thing that is really sinking in is the level of upheaval that Germany was experiencing. That's an easy, no-duh kind of statement, but I've never been walked through the step-by-step of the merry-go-round government milieu that the Nazi regime grew up in (Rosa Luxemburg, Ebert, etc), which was a serious gap in my WWII history education. And I'm only through the Weimer constitution! It sets a lot of the wait-and-see policies of the rest of the world in context. (I love that William Shirer got a shout out)

2) The story of Haber as told by Dodd/Larson was fascinating to me, as I recently finished The Disappearing Spoon, where the extent of Haber's cruelty is detailed. His crimes against humanity really were horrifying, belying the portrait of a wronged war hero that is hinted at. His solidarity with his fellow scientists was admirable but frankly does not do much to redeem him in my eyes after reading the nitty-gritty of his experiments. I guess I just found this surprising from Larson as a narrator to not more strongly disarm us of Dodd's impression of the fragile old man.

3) Where are Mrs. Dodd and Bill Jr. in this story? They just seem to be pawns - hopefully we'll get more insight as to their POV

4) Messersmith seems to be the only character I have much admiration for at this point. He seems to be doing what he can to get the truth out to an unreceptive audience in a complex political situation.

Just my impressions thus far... hope everyone is enjoying as much as I am

Yikes! I'm bringing this book with me on vacation, so I'll be caught up by the time I return!

Just picked up the book from the library today and will start reading it this weekend - can't wait!

Just asked for it from the library - should have it by this weekend.

Frankie wrote: "Messersmith seems to be the only character I have much admiration for at this point. He seems to be doing what he can to get the truth out to an unreceptive audience in a complex political situation."

I agree. At least he's willing to show some backbone and speak his mind. What's most shocking to me is the desire of the "upper class" to look down their noses at everyone else while they turn a blind eye to the atrocities happening all around them.

W. Joe wrote: "

Reading Progress: Through Chapter 8

I'm finding the degree to which there is almost instituti..."

Call me naive because I was born, bread, and am still living in the midwest, but how could people such as William Phillips tell that the beaches were full of "slightly clothed Jews and Jewesses"? Did they dress differently than other Americans did back then?

So far I have read through chapter 4 (pretty good for just my lunch break today). What has struck me the most was actually in the introduction where the author says that before writing this book, to him the era was just black and shades of gray, but really there were colors such as red merigolds lining the street or park (or something). Completely true for me! I realized when I am reading WWII and Nazi-occupation books, I'm always picturing things in black and white. I'm not sure if this is thanks to the lack of color photography and video, or if it is thanks to the bleak reality of the time. Has anyone else ever thought about this?

Amy wrote: "W. Joe wrote: "

Reading Progress: Through Chapter 8

I'm finding the degree to which there ..."

Agreed, that really stood out to me. There seems to be an unspoken code running through the culture about how Jewish people look and act... a reporter later comments that Americans who have been attacked in Germany probably brought it on themselves by the way they were acting. A) This implies again that there is a Jewish way to act that merits attack and B) implicitly validates attacks against the genuinely Jewish victims. Maybe we'll find out more about what the details of the prejudice is later on?

Amy wrote: "So far I have read through chapter 4 (pretty good for just my lunch break today). What has struck me the most was actually in the introduction where the author says that before writing this book, t..."

Very well said - I think Larson's use of descriptive language has been remarkable, especially in the section I'm currently on in Nuremberg. I also loved when he describes the different uniforms of the officers, because it brings so much color into that bleak black and white Berlin of our collective imagination, but it's not with positive connotations.

Amy wrote: "I realized when I am reading WWII and Nazi-occupation books, I'm always picturing things in black and white. I'm not sure if this is thanks to the lack of color photography and video, or if it is thanks to the bleak reality of the time. Has anyone else ever thought about this?"

I had never thought about it before, but you're right. I also think about that era completely in black and white. It makes the perspective all the more cold and dark. Maybe that's fitting considering what was happening.

W. Joe wrote: "

Reading Progress: Through Chapter 8

I'm finding the degree to which there is almost instituti..."
I think it is an interesting point. One would like to think that the upper levels of society with their access to education and the ability to be more worldly would be less inclined toward this type of behavior. The impression I get from the various bits of history and films that I have seen is that people were for want of a better word more tribal and so each group had their reasons for disliking each other and for feeling superiority towards other groups. I guess my point is that group think and having preconceived notions about others seems to happen regardless of class and education.

W. Joe wrote: "Reading Progress: Through Chapter 9

It's amazing to see how flimsy the facade of civilized and polite society is set in front of the atrocities that are being committed to the Jewish population in..."

Think slavery, Jim Crow and the Civil Rights Era in America and it isn't a stretch to see how these things become part of the culture. How could this have happened? I don't have all the answers but for quite some time those who were outspoken and demanded equality met with very unhappy ends. It is the quietness of fear and that feeling deep down in the dark places that is happy that the spotlight isn't on your tribe that keeps your head down in silence.

Amy wrote: "So far I have read through chapter 4 (pretty good for just my lunch break today). What has struck me the most was actually in the introduction where the author says that before writing this book, t..."

What an interesting observation. I had not thought about this but thinking back on how I am reading the book I think I am seeing these people in black and white. I would definitely attribute this to being able to see any historical images only in black and white. Also,many films that I have seen that deal with this era in a serious way also tend to be made in black and white or those that are in color are so have such a bleak and colorless feel to them that they feel like they should be in black and white. It is only when the Nazi's are portrayed in an almost comic book villian sort of way that I see them in color.

I just finished chapter 19 - what? Where is this "matchmaker" thing going? Also, does it surprise anyone else that both Martha and Dodd seem unaware of Martha's reputation, even amongst high ranking government officials?

I think it's interesting to see her reputation so widely known by so many people. I would have thought that discretion would have been more the flavor of that particular era, especially when visiting a foreign country. She doesn't seem to care at all. The entire sense of proper social positioning is so backwards to me. Bigotry and sexual indiscretions are accepted openly in "polite" society, yet there is still an arrogance that pervades social interactions. It makes no sense to me at all. It gives me the creeps.

I'm listening to the audio version, and I've decided I prefer to have the actual book with me when I'm involved in a book club. Live and learn.

These are my not very profound comments:

1. Martha Dodd annoys me. A lot. She annoyed me in the beginning with her secret marriage and her flirtations and her lovers. While she was described as a smart and educated woman, she struck me as a shallow ditz. Now that she is running around being an apologist for the Nazis, my annoyance level has grown. I see her as a seriously delusional romantic. Her secret marriage, her lovers, her rapturous view of Germany -- these things all combine to make me want to discount her completely. And yet, Larsen seems to focus on her more than any other member of the Dodd family. It's hard for me to read a book when I am so frustrated with a major character.

2. I have been struck by how much the rise of Nazism was fed by the populace. I prefer to think that misguided or evil leaders imposed a hateful, bigoted and brutal system from above, and that the innocent and good-souled people, although struggling with the horrors of the regime, simply remained passive to save their own lives. What I'm seeing is that the leaders responded to the anger and hatred of the masses. This makes me uncomfortable, especially as the U.S. faces the rise of populism.

3. I read in the Writer's Almanac yesterday that over 6000 Jews were murdered on August 24, 1349, in Mainz, Germany because they were blamed for the plague. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

Zuzu wrote: "I'm listening to the audio version, and I've decided I prefer to have the actual book with me when I'm involved in a book club. Live and learn.

These are my not very profound comments:

1. M..."

Oh, yes, Martha is most unsympathetic. But even more than that, I find her flat. I find Dodd to be more nuanced and his motives better explained, so that even in his relative passivity, I understand his position. I think the idea might be that Messersmith is the anti-Nazi leaning foil and that Martha is the pro-Nazi leaning foil to contrast our main hero, but while Messersmith has complexity and interest, Martha is just a broken record of the same actions and views.

I also think that part of the purpose of Martha's story is to show us that life in Germany wasn't just the bleak images we conjure up of the era. There was life and joy and antertainment; enough so that not everyone looking in from the outside could understand the extent of what was happening in the government.

Only $100 to ship a car to Germany for the US huh? Ah inflation! Diels has just returned to a changed Berlin - what is everyone thinking so far?

I've finished the book, and I'm still appalled by the bigotry among so many educated people. It makes me think about today's world where we still have such ignorance, even if we want to believe it's on the fringe. It might not compare to Hitler, but the fundamental ignorance is similar. It makes me feel naive. This entire book reflects not only prevalent thinking of the 30's but lingering arrogance that is out there today. Geez....have we learned nothing?

Zuzu wrote: "1. Martha Dodd annoys me. A lot. She annoyed me in the beginning with her secret marriage and her flirtations and her lovers. While she was described as a smart and educated woman, she struck me as a shallow ditz. Now that she is running around being an apologist for the Nazis, my annoyance level has grown...."

Martha was pretty annoying to me as well. Her loose morals didn't bother me so much as her lack of discretion. As the daughter of a diplomat, she really should have known better. But Martha also seemed to seek out the intelligentsia, and then ignored their warnings that the Nazis were dangerous. I read the book a little while ago so I don't remember quite when, but she does see the light eventually.

I admired Messersmith a lot more (HE certainly saw the writing on the wall) but he also seemed a bit snobbish - looking down on Dodd for trying to live within his income.

I just finished Barbara Tuchman's A Distant Mirror: The Calamitous 14th Century talking about Europe in the 14th century. It was really depressing to hear (in detail) how the Jews have pretty much always been scapegoated. Whenever something went wrong - with the plague, worker unrest, etc. - it seems that the Jewish quarter got raided and many people killed. The smallest insult (or perceived insult) was met with retaliation way out of proportion.

Heather wrote: "Messersmith...looking down on Dodd for trying to live within his income..."

It actually annoyed me quite a bit too how lavishly people even underneath him seemed to live, especially in the face of the US depression and tough economic conditions in Germany, their host country. However, it also seems a bit outrageous (I don't know maybe not the right word) how Dodd appeared to have more interest and a stronger stance against dignataries' lavishness than what was happening with Hitler in Germany. I haven't quite finished yet, so maybe he finally realizes Hitler's dictatorship is more pressing.

Amy wrote: "It actually annoyed me quite a bit too how lavishly people even underneath him seemed to live, especially in the face of the US depression and tough economic conditions in Germany, their host country..."

I think you're right, Dodd was overly obsessed with the lavish lifestyles and wastefulness of resources (how many times did he complain about the length of messages back to the US?). There seemed to be class conflict from the beginning, with middle class Dodd (who started life as a poor farmer) butting heads against the casual wealth of the rest of the diplomatic corps. I think it was kind of expected that dignitaries would tap into their own resources to do their jobs -- I guess trading their wealth for power and prestige.

However, I wonder if Dodd had a case of "this situation is way to intense and overwhelming so I'll concentrate on the smaller things that I can control"?? It seemed that the people back home weren't listening to any of the warnings that Dodd or Messersmith gave about the situation in Germany. People were too involved with their own problems, along with the casual anti-Semitism that seemed to pervade the day.

I finished the book this weekend. I think what most surprised me was how the State Department was still worried about Germany paying it's debt back from the previous war and wanting to recall Dodd because he wasn't pushing this hard enough. Dodd really did seem to be in a untenable position. He is trying to report back regarding brutality and the wealthy bond holders are all over the US government regarding war debt payment.

I have never read Erik Larson before but I have to say that I'm really not sure why Martha is in this book at all. Reading about her time in Germany didn't seem relevant for the most part. She seemed to be a woman of more modern sensibilities but one with no impulse control. I am genuinely surprised by her father's continued affection for her regardless of what occurs.

I wish there had been more focus on Dodd himself and his dealings with the internal politics within his own embassy and it's dealings with Hitler's government. Maybe this has been covered more in other books so Mr. Larson didn't want to tread over the same ground.

I just read the line about Moffat's mother who, as a foreigner had survived the purge and found it exciting. That is pretty sick.