Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

I am, Collin, because I'm starting a Challenge in August and hoping to make real progress with it. It's the main thing holding me back right now. It reads pretty quickly though, assuming you don't take the time to look up the foreign words.

Here you go Laura

Collin, I am worried too, but the chunks seem pretty manageable. I always worry about when I start teaching, but I figure I am usually good for at least around 100 or so pages a week, so I am trying to rationalize that and not stare at this huge book in front of me.

Also what I was going to do with my book mishaps was take it out of the library until a copy arrived, maybe you could do that.

Meg wrote: "

Here you go Laura"

Thanks, Meg. I saw that, but it doesn't mention a glossary. I bought the same thing for "Prodigal Summer", and it's just ok to me.

Mainly just looking for a glossary.

This is free and has chapter summaries.

As for keeping up you guys, if we are falling behind we can always adjust the schedule. In the past 100 pages seemed very doable (except, of course, for Ulysses).

I have to say that this book is easy compared to some. It is very readable, meaning that there is easy text and likable situations. Unlike Ulysses which seemed to amble about without a clear focus, this book seems to have focus..that of teaching the reader about the Indian culture.

I ended up ordering a used copy, so I'll have it just in case. I checked my library and they didn't have it. Maybe it won't take too long, I found a copy that ships from my state.
100 pages per week does sound doable, I was thinking it was more than that while I was looking at the book in the store. It's encouraging to hear it's very readable!

Mine came with a damaged corner, Amazon replaced it with another book with a different corner damaged.

Now they say they won't send a third book because they have to check their inventory. Both boxes have different damaged corners that also match the book's damaged corner, and it wasnt wrapped in bubble wrap either time (so, clearly a shipping issue), but they say I'll have to reorder, and they credited my account $10 to expedite the shipping.

Thinking this isn't meant to be.

EDIT: I ordered a used HB for $4 incl shipping, coming from one state away....who knows? Still vaccillating.

you can still read the book with a damaged corner! tell them just to give you the book!!! Mine came in damaged packaging but the book itself was ok...........you know you want to read with us lol!!!

LOL Meg, you're hilarious. Good idea.

Laura wrote: "Mine came with a damaged corner, Amazon replaced it with another book with a different corner damaged.

Now they say they won't send a third book because they have to check their inventory. Both b..."

Pulling Laura toward reading it :)

At least they didn't send you Mexican Architecture of the 16th Century instead...

LOL, yes! I was thinking about you, Vicki. :D

I decided to keep the less-damaged of the two for the $10 disc. $4 for a new-smelling book works for me.

It seems like so many people are having a hard time just getting a hold of the book! That's pretty annoying. I bought mine new from amazon accidentally...I had put it in my cart to save for later so I could do more research into a used copy. I inadvertently bought it while checking out with something else. Glad I did even though I ended up paying 14 dollars for it.

Hope it isn't too early to ask a question...it isn't really a spoiler...does anyone have a clue what the Barsaat Mahal is? A fictional or real place? I've been trying to look it up to no avail and it is driving me crazy. Maybe it is explained better in the book and I just haven't gotten that far...here's hoping!

I got this when I googled it:

Barsat Mahal (Monsoon Palace)

A small linear room with an antique Kerala door at either end has a window which folds down and doubles as a study table. It has a spectacular view of the village and the sun sets. Its wash basin is from a British train and folds out on hinges, much as the window does.

Ever wonder what possess an author to write a novel of this size?

And, I googled this, this book is the 6th longest book. Maybe he was going for a Guiness World Record?

Thanks Meg! That helps...though it's a bit confusing because they keep talking about it almost as if it is a park or something...maybe I should just keep reading!

The 6th longest book? Really? That is pretty crazy. I knew it was long but didn't realize that it was that long. I can't even imagine sitting down and writing something that epic...I would probably want to break it up into several volumes and take breaks in between.

I read it took him 10 years to complete!

I would love to be able to read this one with a group - I'm going to have to see if I can clear some stuff on my reading schedule so I can join you!

I do wonder about writing a book of this length....is it intentional & necessary or does it just turn out this way because the author keeps thinking of things to add and expand on as he/she goes along?

Now I want to know the titles' of the five that are longer.

Well, I am betting our "favorite" chunky is one of them!

Interesting! I guess I have some very chunky books I should read some day.

Ulysses is not on the list of top ten!

I noticed that. But, I think it might make the top of the list if it were novels that "felt" the longest.

That is very funny Irene!

It made me feel a little better to see they cram a bunch of words on a page in this book...I feel like I am doing really well and then I see that I have only read a couple pages. I am a slow reader to begin with so I am sure that doesn't help!

I agree, it reads fast, but not many pages turn. I feel your pain, Stacy.

I found a site with some cultural references that might help.



I'll be posting others as I find them.

Here's a good one, like a mini glossary of some common words.

This one's alphabetized! WOOT!

To borrow from that Laura, I think this is important to keep in mind while we read this:

The Role of the Family

. People typically define themselves by the groups to which they belong rather than by their status as individuals. Someone is deemed to be affiliated to a specific state, region, city, family, career path, religion, etc.
. This group orientation stems from the close personal ties Indians maintain with their family, including the extended family.
. The extended family creates a myriad of interrelationships, rules, and structures. Along with these mutual obligations comes a deep-rooted trust among relatives.

Good point. That link is very helpful. Kind of like "Indian Culture for Dummies - Quick Reference Guide" - lol.

I need to print this character list, that's for sure!

That's a great list, thanks for posting.

Well I easily finished the reading. One thing that surprised me was that they do April Fool's Day there. I didn't know it was an international thing. Am I the only one that thought that?

I did not know that either. Is it originally Brittish and therefore went with the Brits wherever they set up colonies?

I, too, was surprised by the April 1st reference, but they all seemed so much to want to be considered modern and things modern seemed to be Western. Perhaps this is the reason the April Fool's idea appeared.

What strikes me most is the control that the parents hold and the limited ability to achieve any type of freedom from that control particularly for the girls. I have to say I kind of like the grandfather who is so "strong minded" to put it nicely. It did crack me up when Dr Seth was in the movie theater crying his eyes out about a movie, and yet, when it comes to his family he does not seem to have a tender cell in him.

The stringent limits though are really what is the most fascinating. The idea that parents seem to make all the decisions and the arranged marriages really bump up against our ideas of today. I can't imagine only knowing a person an hour before marrying them. Although fairly recently a neighbor's daughter, had an arranged marriage. She had only seen her husband six times in six months before they were married.

And they still do arranged marriages in India (and elsewhere, I guess) - right? Is this cultural, or religious? Does anyone know? I'm pretty sure this is still done in India.

Laura wrote: "And they still do arranged marriages in India (and elsewhere, I guess) - right? Is this cultural, or religious? Does anyone know? I'm pretty sure this is still done in India."

I am pretty sure they still do in India, Pakistan, and some Asian countries. I think it is both religious (as in the case of my neighbor being an Orthodox Jew) as well as cultural, keeping the race/culture pure. I read that in Japan, it was done up to the 1950's.

Interesting. Thanks, M.

Arranged marriages were the norm in much of the world until relatively recently. Common backgrounds, family compatibility, shared values were all seen as critical to a good marriage, not romantic attraction which could be fleating. Parents were seen as better suited to determining these factors than an unexperienced youth. About a decade or so ago, I came across a fascinating article about young Indians raised in the US who were returning to the practice of arranged marriages after finding that they were unsatisfied with the results of finding their own mates. The numerous individuals (all college educated urban folks in N.J.) were reporting that they saw greater contentment in marriage among their parent's generation than among their peers who selected their own mate.

That's very interesting! I wish my daughter would let me pick her husband, lol.

Or do I? Hmmm.....

I hope to start this book within the next week or so. Need to finish a few other books first.
Love wasn't a factor in marriages until fairly recently in the life of humans. Love is a fairly new idea to marriage and relationships (of course, one could always have a love dalliance on the side but one could not marry for love).
If property and money were involved, arranged marriages were the norm, I think. It was important to keep assets together and have them grow, if possible. Happiness didn't play a part for anyone.
Only the poor were free to choose for themselves because....well, in the eyes of society, who cared who they married; they had nothing (asset wise) to worry about. A person's being/personality wasn't taken into consideration; only property, money and status.

I know a few people from cultures that arrange marriage and it seems that, for most of the families, arranged marriages are still the norm but the younger generation have more of a say about whether the marriage goes through than they used to. They can meet and get to know each other, as long as chaperones are around (not necessarily within earshot but watching), and the young folks have the final say about whether they will marry. So, it's kind of a compromise between choosing and arranging. I've seen only happy marriages from these arrangements.

I wonder if, historically speaking, arranged marriages contributed to the social acceptance of adultery (European monarchs immediately come to mind). Though I also can't help but think that this whole system completely supports the idea of male privilege since people were a lot more willing to turn the other cheek when men had mistresses outside of marriage. It just worked out so well for them...they had their wives which kept their family happy, and their endless stream of mistresses which kept them happy. Do anyone know anything about whether or not it was socially acceptable for Indian men to cheat during the time of this novel? Maybe that will play itself out later? We certainly have a ways to go!

I was also surprised at how important the darkness (or lightness) of skin is/was. It appears that the lighter you are the higher your place in society. I am reading another book about India right now as well, and they also refer to skin color.

While in the African-American community, it's just the opposite (I believe). Yeah, I found that interesting too, Meg.

My daughter just married a young man from the Philippines and many of his relatives traveled here for the wedding. In one of the conversations we had, his aunt said that the people stay out of the sun, wear hats, use umbrellas because they do not want to get any darker. Dark skin is not beautiful to them. I was very surprised to hear that.

Marialyce wrote: "My daughter just married a young man from the Philippines and many of his relatives traveled here for the wedding. In one of the conversations we had, his aunt said that the people stay out of the ..."

And here I have so many friends addicted to tanning beds! Cultures can be very different.

A number of years ago, I read an excellent expose on the link between skin color and the perception of beauty. According to this sociologist, a culture values the skin shade that is associated with leisure/wealth. Until the past century, dark/tanned skin was not valued in any European culture, or any of their colonies because it was associated with manual labor such as farm work. The lighter the skin, the clearer it was that you had the leisure to stay in the shade and the wealth to allow it. With the rise of industrial sweatshops, pale skin suddenly could be a mark of manual labor. Wealth could be designated by the freedom to be outdoors and the tan it brought. This was heightened with the rise of the "jet set" who could afford the time and the money to vacation in warm climates. Most cultures with a large work force still engaged in preindustrial types of manual labor associate dark skin with such low paying work. Areas colonized by Europeans also have the association of light skin with the wealthier and more powerful colonizers. Often the colonizing forces rewarded natives whose complexion was closer in tone to their own, further conveying an advantage to light skin.

That makes so much sense, thanks for that Irene!