Brain Pain discussion

This discussion covers Part II: The Editor, Yvonne Marmelle – pp. 107-179


In this section, Michener gives us the great American “opportunity for all” story. He introduces us to 11-year-old Jewish tomboy “Shirl”, who makes her way out of the old neighborhood and works her way to the top of the New York publishing world.

I thought this section of the book was flat. Betty Smith's A Tree Grows in Brooklyn is the gold standard for the story of a Brooklyn girl makes good through intelligence, hard work and talent. Herman Wouk tells the stories of nice Jewish girls who make good in several of his early books. His characters are interesting and engaging. Michener's description of Shirl didn't measure up.

Jenny wrote: "I thought this section of the book was flat. Betty Smith's A Tree Grows in Brooklyn is the gold standard for the story of a Brooklyn girl makes good through intelligence, hard work and talent. Her..."

Good points. He probably didn't need to go so far into her back story. Maybe he was trying too hard to show what she had at stake with Yoder's success and failure, contrasting her business success with Yoder against her romantic failure with Benno. Maybe trying to show the sources of her drive and endurance in the publishing world. And again, these characters become mouthpieces for Michener's essay ideas about what writing is and should be.

I did like the description of her early discovery of the library. I had a similar love of libraries, but from an earlier age.

Sorry about my lack of participation. I've just gotten home from the hospital after my appendix burst. It's time to get back into reading now! Pain killers give a unique dimension to books :)

Catherine wrote: "Sorry about my lack of participation. I've just gotten home from the hospital after my appendix burst. It's time to get back into reading now! Pain killers give a unique dimension to books :)"

Yikes!!! I hope you're convalescing okay. Join in when you're feeling up to it...

I don't know, Catherine. A burst appendix? What's next, the dog ate my homework? :-)

Bill wrote: "I don't know, Catherine. A burst appendix? What's next, the dog ate my homework? :-)"

Yeah, I know, really banal. I thought about "the dog ate my homework" excuse, but these days it's "the computer ate my homework."

While the inside information in Part One and Part Two are very interesting, both of these characters seem crippled in dealing with people. Since I also have my best relationships with books......is there no hope? I'm surprised there hasn't been a single cat, yet....

On to the critic.

April the Cheshire Meow wrote: "While the inside information in Part One and Part Two are very interesting, both of these characters seem crippled in dealing with people. Since I also have my best relationships with books......is..."

April, what do you mean by "crippled"? Each character deals with people in highly idiosyncratic ways, but I wouldn't characterize them as "crippled." They are creatures of their backgrounds and context, but also much more than that. If you could provide some examples, I would really appreciate it.

Yoder and Marmelle certainly have their flaws. Yoder shies away from the nitty gritty of the publishing world and Marmelle tries to save Benno, but I'm not sure they're exactly crippled. They have each attained success in their chosen careers, so they've at least got that.

I don't think Yoder is crippled, he is older than the other characters and he lives the life he wants exactly as he wants to. He works hard at his writing, enjoys his art work and has settled into a life he enjoys. There are far worse things to do with yourself.

I thought that Marmelle was too much of a set character. Daughter of immigrants who loves books, gets a job, learns how to speak and dress, goes to night school and makes good only to almost loose it all because she picks the wrong man.

Jenny wrote: "I thought that Marmelle was too much of a set character...."

I've read this book a few times over the years and given its metafictional nature, I wonder if he is using the "expected" to comment on the conventions of pop-lit. In some ways, The Novel is a non-fiction essay on literature and publishing disguised as a novel. The result is more engaging (and profitable) book than the kind of lit-crit book that Streibert writes in part three.

To me, both 'Part' characters are living within a cramped behavorial intellect of some kind. Obviously, their flaws have not damaged their careers; in the case of the Yoders, their religious conformism (despite the fact they have broken out of their background environments) probably made them the successful people they are - nose to the grindstone, early to bed, early to rise, a clean house is a clean mind, etc etc etc. I think even if they won a billion dollars in a lottery, they would live in the same house in the same county (do they call legislative districts counties back east?) with the same lifestyle, perhaps eat out more.

Marmelle can't stop herself from wanting to rescue a grown up man as if he were a child, even though she KNOWS all of the tropes. Her next guy could very well be another man-child, one that could destroy her career.

To me that is crippled. The writer and the editor are lucky folks that it doesn't derail their career success. A lot of extremely successful people once behind closed doors or in their private life are incompetent or even harmful in their intimate affairs. Michener is not explicitly putting it out there, but he sure did not make his characters nuanced.