Chicks On Lit discussion
Archive 08-19 GR Discussions
>
CC - Watership Down by Richard Adams
Mod
Has anyone read any other books my this author? I read The Plague Dogs decades ago when I was in high school, and thinking about the ending of that book still makes me want to choke up! It is one of my few 5-star books. I hope this one is even half as good.
I'm in! Just need to get the book but I should be good to go :) I actually have never read anything by this author, so I'm looking forward to it!
I'm in, as long as my baby doesn't come first. I'm due May 4th.
Congratulations, Viola! I didn't realize you are having a baby. That's very exciting! I haven't read anything by this author and am looking forward to reading his work.
I had a look on Wikipedia to find out a bit about him. He looks like a lovely grandfatherly type.
Wikipedia has this to say about his career as an author:
"Adams had originally begun telling the story of Watership Down to his two daughters, and they insisted that he publish it as a book. It took two years to write. In 1972, after four publishers and three writers' agencies had turned down the manuscript for Watership Down, Rex Collings agreed to publish the work. The book gained international acclaim almost immediately.
Over the next few years Watership Down sold over a million copies worldwide and became a modern classic. Adams won both of the two most prestigious British children's book awards, one of six authors to do so: the Carnegie Medal and the Guardian Children's Fiction Prize. To date, Adams' best-known work has sold over 50 million copies worldwide.
In 1974, following publication of his second novel, Shardik, he left the Civil Service to become a full-time author."
He seems to be a natural author; his books sold immediately. He must have been a great story-teller to his children.
Mod
Congrats Viola! Super excited for you :) Thanks for posting that Petra, I think I will enjoy this book!
I will join in with this one. I've been meaning to read it for ages!
I've read it & will lurk around for the discussion.
Jennifer W wrote: "I will join in with this one. I've been meaning to read it for ages!"So have I. Will plan to join the group read too.
Almost time to start this discussion. Anyone started reading yet?
I haven't but will probably start sometime over the weekend.
Does anyone know how to add a picture to a post? :(
Mod
< img src=" http://www.goodreads.com/image..." width="40" height="100" alt="description"/ >
(Width must be 0-400, Height must be 0-1000, alt is a description of the image. All three are optional, but recommended.)
the http part is the web address of the picture you want to add, so you would replace their goodreads example with the address for the picture. I also put a space after the < and before the > so if you copy and paste you will need to remove the spaces. I tend to leave out the width, height, and description part.
Mod
< img src="https://d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net..." >
Have read and enjoyed the book sometime back.So I'll join the discussion too!
I've started it, I think I'm going to need help with the names. None seem to be sticking for me.
Jennifer, I thought it might be a good idea to list the rabbits, too. Here's who I think has left the warren. Let me know if I've missed anyone and I'll add them:
Hazel: The main character. He is initially the only rabbit who trusts his brother Fiver.
Fiver: Hazel's younger brother; his Lapine name is Hrairoo, which means "Little-thousand". He is a seer, and his visions of the destruction of the Sandleford warren compel him to leave, along with his brother Hazel and several other rabbits.
Bigwig: His name in Lapine is Thlayli, which means "Fur-head" and refers to the shock of fur on the top of his head.
Blackberry: A clever buck rabbit with black-tipped ears. He is often capable of understanding concepts that the other rabbits find incomprehensible.
Dandelion: A buck rabbit notable for his storytelling ability and speed.
Pipkin: A small and timid buck rabbit, who looks to Hazel for guidance and protection. Hazel encourages him, and Pipkin grows very loyal to Hazel. His name is Hlao-Roo in Lapine.
Silver: A large rabbit with grey fur and the Threarah's nephew. A member of the Sandleford Owsla, he chose to leave with Hazel's band. His solid reliability served Hazel at those times when Bigwig's hot-headedness is more a hindrance than help.
Hawkbit: Described in the beginning as a "rather slow, stupid rabbit", he joins Hazel's company in the escape from Sandleford. Together with Speedwell and Acorn, he begins complaining and insisting on returning to the warren. Later, Hawkbit apologizes to Hazel and from thence forth is a loyal and dependable follower.
Buckthorn: A tough, sturdy rabbit with a quiet and easygoing nature. Like Silver, he is steadfast and dependable in a crisis.
Speedwell and Acorn: Outskirters from Sandleford who join up with Hazel's band and early in the journey side with Hawkbit when he wants to go back. Both develop into reliable and loyal sentries.
It's April 1st. We've officially started this read. I'm about half way through the first section and really enjoying this book. It's light, warm, fun, suspenseful at times, interesting. I'm looking forward to seeing where this story takes us.
To get us started, here are a few trivia questions:
Which rabbit predicts that something terrible will happen to the warren in the beginning?
(A) Hazel
(B) Fiver
(C) Bigwig
(D) Holly
Which rabbit tells great stories?
(A) Hazel
(B) Speedwell
(C) Acorn
(D) Dandelion
Who is the smartest of the rabbits?
(A) Blackberry
(B) Hazel
(C) Fiver
(D) Bigwig
Viola wrote: "I'm in, as long as my baby doesn't come first. I'm due May 4th."Congratulations and best wishes,Viola!
Mod
Trivia:
#1. Fiver predicts it. I like Fiver so far. I like how he acts. I like how he threw himself down and had a fit when they tried to tell the head/chief rabbit (forgot his name) their doom and gloom prediction.
Anyone else have a favorite rabbit so far?
I like Fiver and Hazel. I can't say that I dislike any of the rabbits.My favorite, so far, is Pipkin, perhaps because he's the weakest and needs protection. I like how Hazel watches out for him and calls him by his nickname, Hlao-Roo, which shows friendship and caring.
I finished Part 1 last night. That last chapter was suspenseful. My heart really went out to our group of rabbits. Which is better to the self and the tribe, a known way of life or an unknown one? Both have consequences. Which lifestyle takes away the most from an individual? From a tribe? Which adds the most to an individual? To a tribe?
I finished part 1 yesterday. So, why is this considered a classic? I can see why it might be a children's classic. But, I am not seeing it as an adult classic. What am I missing? It is a fun story about the adventures of a group of anthropomorphic rabbits. Well written as children stories go, but I do not see why it is considered a must read for adults.
I'm not sure about an answer for that, Irene. I don't know if we're far enough into the book yet to really know? So far, it's a light, delightful story.I can see some themes being introduced: home & family, being true to oneself, standing up for oneself & one's community, leadership without lording it over the community. These themes (if they develop further) could be enough to turn this story into a classic.....maybe? Guess we'll see as the story unfolds.
How are you enjoying it, in general? Do you see it as mainly a child's book?
Mod
"Watership Down has been described as an allegory, with the labours of Hazel, Fiver, Bigwig, and Silver "mirror[ing] the timeless struggles between tyranny and freedom, reason and blind emotion, and the individual and the corporate state." Adams draws on classical heroic and quest themes from Homer and Virgil, creating a story with epic motifs. Although critics have drawn parallels to fables of old, connoting the tale as a microcosm of past human exoduses, Adams in 2005 revealed that: "Watership Down was never intended to be some sort of allegory or parable. It is simply the story about rabbits made up and told in the car."
So I guess this is either an epic story along the lines of Homer and Virgil, or a story about rabbits the author told to his kids in the car! LOL
LOL! That's funny, Sheila. Basically, I think it is a tale of bunnies told to his children.
Yet, the act of writing it down would have changed it somewhat as it's from memory. Parts were probably expanded and details added, etc. With the help of his editors, the story would have somehow deepened.....or?
I'm guessing, of course. I think the act of writing allows for change, organization, additions, details, etc.
However, in essence, this is a story born out of a long car ride and bored children. Told on the fly like that, there's not much (or any) thought to depth or allegory in the telling.....but maybe a bit in the writing.
So far, the idea of the story being as heroic and thematic as Homer & Virgil doesn't seem right. It's putting too much depth and author's thoughts into this book. (I don't mean to belittle Adams with that comment; just that I don't think his intention was to write a deep, philosophical allegory)
I have an author intro in my edition. Adams says that it was his tradition to tell his kids stories on car rides, both made up and those he knew. This one came out of a particularly long ride for which he did not have anything canned on hand sufficiently long. On subsequent rides, the kids asked him to expand on this story until his kids encouraged him to write it down and share it. It took him a long time to find a publisher because it was clearly a kid story told in adult language, so it did not find a ready-made market. He denies that there is any allegorical meaning to this story.
Took me a while to get the book so I'm a bit behind. Will chime in soon :)
Finished part 3 over the weekend. It is still reading like a well written children's story for me. I am not happy with the attitude toward women that I am getting. They appear to be valued only for their breeding function. Um, Adams was telling this story to his daughters.
I'm not quite finished Part 2 and there are no does yet. But, I've gotten that gist, Irene. When the rabbits talk about not digging the burrows because that is the work of does, I shake my head. What...you don't live in the warm, dry burrows? What....you'd rather live out in the open than dig yourself a burrow? What....you're time is too precious to dig a burrow? I've had some concerns on the roles of the does when they come to the warren.
The book was first published in 1972, which was well into the women's lib/women-are-equal movement. Assuming that Adams told this story to his daughters a few years before publishing (guessing at the time it would take to write & publish the book), it's still an old-fashioned statement to be making to his daughters. He is old-school English, though, which would explain some of this attitude.
Looking at his bio, he may have told this story to his daughters much earlier (late 50s or early 60s), so perhaps the women's lib movement hadn't caught on yet.
I agree that in today's world, the attitude of male and female roles being so segregated are glaring.
It is not the idea of segregated labor that bothered me. I figured that was a result of his knowledge of actual rabbit behavior. Although I do not know if it is true or not, I just assumed that Adams knew that, in the wild, female rabbits primarily dig holes. My problem is when this group of rabbits realizes that they need baby rabbits if they are going to start a colony. Without baby rabbits, they all just die off. So, they set off to get does so that they can have a new generation. It seems as if the only reason to have females around is to breed. Even if this was written around 1960, women should have had more than breeding value for a father. And, he is not coming off as too old school. As you get into part 3, we have Bigwig insinuating himself into the oslaw of another rabbit group. One of the priviledges of serving in this military group is the right to demand any female at will. We see him calling for a female and hear them talk that it is not her time to be fertile. These are not traditional old school topics for children's literature.By the way, I did not know before this that doe and buck were the terms for female and male rabbits.
Are we still discussing Part One on April 9th or is everyone pretty much ahead?
Mod
Dee, yes, we'll be discussing part 1 all week. I'm looking forward to hearing what everyone has to say.
Mod
I am really starting to wonder what is going on in the warren they have now come to in Part One. Something just doesn't seem "right" here. I guess we will find out more as we go on. Seems a bit creepy though, in their perfect life. I have a feeling whomever is dropping the cigarette butts is a bad guy?
I'm at the same part Sheila. And I agree, I have an ominous feeling about this warren...
Yay, Dee & Sheila! It starts getting good now. Can't wait to hear your thoughts. Post 25 has some questions about the ending of Part 1, meant as a starting point for discussion.
Just finished Part One. This book isn't reading as well as I thought it would. I expected more of a 'Redwall' type of book but it isn't really. I want to read it like a children's book but the language is too varied for it to be that. I'm finding myself drifting and not being as engaged with this book as I would like. The ending of this section was anti-climactic for me. I was expecting something much more sinister so it didn't really sate my imagination.
As far as the "attitude towards women" goes...the author clearly stated that this was not meant to be an "allegory or a parable". He was not using this book to exhibit or portray his moral views. The habits of the rabbits, in terms of feeding, mating, habitation, etc. are all based on fact and research. Female rabbits, or does, are the ones who dig the burrows as that will be home for their litters. And yes, their primary jobs are to mate and reproduce, and all the activities associated with that (i.e. burrowing).
That being said, of course he only incorporated facts that were appropriate and relevant to the story. For example, I'm not sure if this
{"Wild rabbits live in colonies in which females outnumber males. Each female, with or without offspring, attacks the young of other does. Bucks act as moderators at this stage. When the young males reach puberty, however, the adult males try to eliminate them as rivals by castrating them." www.fao.org/docrep/t1690e/t1690e00.htm)}
will necessarily make it into the book, but interesting nonetheless! Not as audience friendly probably :)
Hahahahahahah! No, that did not make it into the book. I did figure that the burrowing assigned to females was simply consistency with rabbit behavior. But, he does attribute attitudes to his male rabbits that are more than simply the results of research on animal behavior. Since we can no more know about affection between male & female rabbits than we can know about friendship between male rabbits, I saw his portrayal of female rabbits as not much more than breeding machines as a bit more unsettling.
I do agree with you that this is a children's story. Although the vocabulary is not typical of a child's book, I think that if it were read to a child, the narrative would be clear despite the words they would not know. I think it could be a great way to introduce children to new words.
Mod
Petra's questions from post 25:
"Which is better to the self and the tribe, a known way of life or an unknown one? Both have consequences. Which lifestyle takes away the most from an individual? From a tribe? Which adds the most to an individual? To a tribe?"
I think it depends on the situation and location. They left their original warren because Fiver sensed the impending development. We don't know what is happening with those rabbits now, so not sure if leaving was the best decision for them, but if Fiver's predictions are true, the development would have destroyed their warren so moving was probably best. This new warren they found though is just bad. The rabbits their know their life, and know their fate, but live in denial of it, don't speak of it, and just reap the rewards. I don't think that is a good life. I think these rabbits are much better off leaving. I would say staying would take away from the individual, in that they would have to live in denial of their fears, and just secretly hope they were not the next to die.
So far, I am thinking the unknown is better than the known, though honestly, only Fiver seems to know that bad things are happening or coming. The rest are just following on his predictions without really understanding. (stupid rabbits!)
Sheila, I found the ending climactic as well. I was already sad that Bigwig was dead. I was sure he was a goner.For the question, I was thinking more in terms of Cowslip's warren. What did they give up (personally and as a tribe/community) in order to have an easy life of food and "peace"?
Hazel's group are natural. They may have taken a leap when they left their warren but their actions are "rabbit-y" in every sense.
Cowslip's group aren't natural. They don't forage for food; it's supplied. They don't live to their utmost; they exist until the snare gets them. They are under stress always, which warps their perspectives, outlooks and actions.
Our group (Hazel's bunnies) is in limbo, for sure. They don't know if leaving their warren was right or puts them in a better place. They only know that they've got to go forward.
ETA: I suppose that's the best of test of a community: trust in each other and working together. Hazel's group are standing together well.
I did not think of Cowslip's group in terms of known vs unknown way of life. I need to think about that. I thought of it in terms of sacrificing the individual for the group. Better one innocent person die than that all suffer hunger and the threat of predators. Both groups would have experienced constent stressors: Cowslip's group had the snare, Hazel's group had cats, foxes, humans, famine, etc. The difference I saw was that Hazel's had some skills for combating its threats while Cowslip's group did not. Like our ancestors before natural disasters and disease, Cowslip's community could not be vigilant nor prepared, but had to be passive before a threat beyond their control. Hazel's group was always watchful and vigilant because they had some ability to engage the forces that threatened them.
Mod
Sheila, I've rather lost the thread of my thoughts on the origin of that question, now that I think about it.I remember thinking that Adams may have been making a statement on the types of lifestyle that a community could adapt in order to survive and how this choice of lifestyle psychologically changes the individuals in the group, as well as the group itself.
Cowslip's warren were "odd" because of their chosen lifestyle. They chose the relatively pampered life of being fed, this was some sort of security for them. But that security came with an even bigger insecurity of putting their lives on the line each & every time they left the warren.
There were things they could have done, had they been less passive to the situation:
- leave the warren
- learn how to identify when the men were laying the snares and then avoiding the traps
Both of these active solutions would mean a loss of their ready food supply. Therefore, it's possible that the ready food supply was considered more important than the lives of the rabbits in the warren.
The result was an easy and secure life (no foraging, no hunger...a known life, I guess I called it) but at the cost of stress, loss, uncertainty. This type of stress is unhealthy. It removes confidence and security.
Hazel's group had to take care of all aspects of life themselves. They had to find shelter, food, protection. Life was more uncertain for them (the unknown life, I guess). There's stress involved in finding all the necessities of Life from the unknown and unfamiliar world, such as Hazel's group find themselves. But it is a healthier type of stress. They find what they need & therefore grow mentally strong and self-assured.
That's kind of where my thoughts were going at the end of this Part. However, I'm not sure if Adams meant to put all that into this story. I'm sure he didn't when he told his daughters the story in the car but I think in putting it down in words, he had to embellish the story a little or it wouldn't have been this long. Even a long car ride wouldn't warrant a story with this much detail. LOL!
I was looking around to see if there were any discussion questions for this book that may pertain to Part 1 and found this question often popping up:What do you think about how rabbits are used in the story?
I'm not sure if we can answer this question now or later in the book.
I haven't given a thought as to why rabbits were used, other than Adams was telling the story to his small daughters and little kids like rabbits.
Maybe there's more to the choice of using rabbits than that?
Mod
But to satisfy all the literature critics around the world, I suppose we could come up with some great sociological theories as to the significance to the use of rabbits, the type of person each individual rabbit represents, etc. Since others have compared the book to The Odyssey and The Iliad, why not? LOL!
Chicks On Lit
Books mentioned in this topic
Watership Down (other topics)Thin Blue Smoke (other topics)
Mrs. Frisby and the Rats of NIMH (other topics)
The Odyssey (other topics)
The Iliad (other topics)
More...
We start reading on April 1st and will start discussions soon afterwards.
The book is divided into 4 Parts. I thought it would be easy and (probably) more complete to discuss each part as a whole.
Here is the reading schedule for
April 1-9: Part 1, The Journey, pages 15-128
Start reading and begin discussion.
April 10-19: Part 2, On Watership Down, pages 129-265
April 20-29: Part 3, Efrafa, pages 267-371
April 30-May 9: Part 4, Hazel-Rah, pages 373-478