Reading 1001 discussion
This topic is about
Them
Past BOTM discussions
>
Them by Joyce Carol Oats
date
newest »
newest »
Mod
1. In his Introduction, Greg Johnson describes Joyce Carol Oates’s focus on “the inner lives of her three protagonists and the manifold ways in which their innocence and humanity are slowly eroded by the soul-destroying forces of Detroit” (p. xii). What are these “soul destroying sources”? What strengths do each of these characters–Loretta, and her children Maureen and Jules–draw on, in order to survive their challenging circumstances?
2. According to Oates, the original title of them was “Love and Money.” What does love mean to the central characters of the novel? Do the women view it differently from the men? Do any characters exhibit sexual behavior that you would expect to find in someone of the opposite gender?
3. What part does money play in the novel? What does it represent to Maureen?
4. Describe the roles that Maureen, Jules, and Betty play in the Wendall family. Is Maureen a typical middle child? How much influence do Loretta and Howard have in reinforcing each sibling’s position? As the children grow up, do their traditional roles change at all?
5. Author and literary critic Alfred Kazin wrote, “Oates is unlike many women writers in her feeling for the pressure, mass, density of violent American experience not known to the professional middle class.” Do you agree? What motivates characters such as Brock, Nadine, and Furlong to commit violent acts?
6. Maureen struggles to further her education despite her poor grades, and Jules fantasizes about going to college. Why is education so important to them?
7. “[Jules] was immensely grateful for being white,” writes Oates. “In Detroit, being white struck him as a special gift . . . Only in a nightmare might he bring his hands up to his face and see colored skin. Negro skin, a hopeless brown nothing could get off, not even a razor” (p. 360). Using examples from the novel, describe how Oates portrays the racial mix in Detroit and the growing tensions leading up to the 1967 riot. Which characters in the novel clearly come from a particular social class, and where do the Wendalls fit on the social ladder?
8. After the Detroit riot, a television camera captures Jules saying, “Fire burns and does its duty” (pp. 532—33). What do you think he means?
9. Why do you think Oates put a somewhat autobiographical character named Joyce Carol Oates into her novel, and what do you make of this innovative choice? Can you think of other contemporary examples of writers putting themselves into their novels, in a fictionalized form?
10. In her 1969 Author’s Note, a section she would later characterize (in her 2000 Afterword) as a playful piece of fiction, Oates wrote, “Nothing in the novel has been exaggerated in order to increase the possibility of drama–indeed, the various sordid and shocking events of slum life, detailed in other naturalistic works, have been understated here, mainly because of my fear that too much reality would become unbearable” (p. xxiv) What was your reaction to this powerfully graphic narrative? Did you find it realistic? Understated? Sensational?
I'll say something in reference to question 9 now, "Can you think of other contemporary examples of writers putting themselves into their novels, in a fictionalized form?" because it comes to mind. In his novel New York Trilogy Paul Auster`s protagonist, a detective, goes to Auster's house to talk to him about something.
I just finished the novel. I think it deserves to be on the 1001 list. It most reminded me of Invisible Man by Ralph Ellison and Fall on Your Knees by Anne-Marie MacDonald.About the soul-destroying forces, I think that's mainly poverty, esp poverty in a wealthy country which is especially demoralizing. Also the crime in the environment which is driven mostly by the poverty.
The characters have a variety of behaviors an perceptions of "love", so this question is difficult. Maureen seems unable to experience romantic love while her mother Loretta falls in love readily and repeatedly. Jules has a love-at-first-sight obsession.
I'll plan to add more later, it's getting late.
BTW, Oates is one of the U. S.'s most prolific living writers and when President Obama awarded the National Humanities medal to her he said, "I'm surprised you didn't already have this". Oates has fifty books that all have more than 1000 ratings on Goodreads- amazing.
Alright: Finished this one recently, and as is common, have too many thoughts lol:1. The Soul destroying forces definitely seem to be a combination of poverty, abuse, systemic racism and the resulting rioting, mental illness, and the ‘perfect storm’ of insidiousness that ties all of these factors together. Loretta has her hopes for her children and her optimism in the face of hardship to help cope with it, Maureen seems strongly inclined to survival, Jules seems to be the least adaptive and tends to lean into amorality in the face of challenges.
2. Not gonna lie- glad she changed it. The original title makes it sound like one of those intrigue based high society full of affairs stories- doesn’t match my idea of this book at all even if those are 2 main themes. Love seems like something Loretta falls into easy (to the point of naivety?) and represents salvation, to Maureen it’s something other people feel (to her it’s a transaction). To Jules, it seems to be a quick overwhelming but baseless infatuation- like addiction. As for whether their behavior seems gender nonconforming- maybe? But not something that I would have ascribed myself. I guess Maureen is the ‘cold transactional’ one, and Jules is the one that falls head over heels easily but I think those assumptions are largely misattributions of culture, and the characters seemed correct to me. So many sex workers and working class married women view love and sex as transactional- that’s not a ‘male thing- and so many men get aggressively infatuated with the idea of women they don’t really know, or don’t even have a healthy relationship with.
3. Everything- everything is about money when you’re poor. Your life expectancy, your entitlement to your own dreams, ‘love’ really means, all of it. To Maureen it means the ability to attain freedom and independence and break the cycle of poverty- but her only means to do so helps incur it. That’s the cycle and that’s why it’s vicious.
4. On the surface you have the serious one, snarky one, the bad one. Kind of a sitcom lineup, but real sad. I also just realized I have no notion of what a typical middle child is: I either know families with 1-2 kids so it doesn’t apply, or families like my Grandmere’s where there’s like 20+ kids (shout-out to rural French-Catholics in the 20-50s lol) so the designation of middle is meaningless. Is it that they don’t get attention? I suppose that kind of fits, but isn’t the first thing I would say in defining her? I would also say as they grow up none of them have traditional roles.
5. Ummm…I find this to be a weird comment honestly. Why specify women writers in that? That makes it seem like this critic thinks that most women writers can’t capture that sense of working class urban restlessness. I’ve found many from acorss the 20th century that do it extremely well (many better than Oates in my opinion). I think the only accurate part of that statement is that the professional middle class tends to struggle with getting an authentic feel of urban or rural working class life. I think desperation, lack of opportunity, the higher likelihood of environmental and developmental problems, and intergenerational trauma all contribute the violence as seen in this book.
6. This makes so much sense to me. Higher education is something I love- but it’s also the standard ‘get out’ card. And it is because it largely works if you can do it- having a post-secondary degree is the single greatest predictor of breaking the cycle of poverty/lower SES quality of life. It’s also how the US military recruits so many disadvantaged youth- because they’ll pay for your education- if you live and are able to handle it.
7. Most of what I remember from this aspect was how Jules seems quite racist in that white trash “at least I’ve got something to be superior about” way, yet revels in the race riot violence for no reason other than his own euphoria with it. The Wendell’s are definitely lower class.
8. Well, he’s a long time arsonist, so on the surface it can easily mean he loves fire because it does what you expect it to do, and does it grandly. On a thematic level, it’s comparable to the destruction caused by poverty and that once that cycle has begun, it keeps burning and perpetuating until there’s a outside force that has to put it out.
9. I mean she also came from a traumatic working class background, and it could be her way of saying “this is in part my story as well”. This self-insert wasn’t as egregious as others on the list (looking at you Coetzee), but generally I don’t like it: I find it a little self-congratulatory if done wrong and usually takes me out of the story unless it’s largely autobiographical to begin with. If I recall, Orhan Pamuk did this in Snow (not horrible), J.M Coetzee did this in Dusklands (ugh).
10. At first I thought “it’s a bit much” but then I read her bio and remember the lives of a lot of people in my family and hometown and thought ‘naw it’s about right’. The only real problem I had with this book is I got the point and all, but I just wasn’t moved by it. Sadly, that’s a problem I generally seem to have with Oates despite her pedestal-like reputation: I want to like her work more than I do. Explorations of independent womanhood, working class barriers and tragedies, academia, etc should all hit me right in the heart- but something about her writing I find a little procedural and lacking in giving ‘heart’ to the characters or story that makes me (who already gets their struggle) have that compassionate and deep response that should be automatic. I had to look up her bio because at one point I thought she was likely born middle class and that’s why none of it felt real to me. I guess I just don’t vibe with her writing style that much.
I agree with the similar books that George mentioned, but I liked those ones more honestly. Like, not to be a Canadian supremacist (lol!) but I felt like this book was like the bronze medal to Fall on Your Knees and The Tin Flute. I gave it 3 stars: dunno if I would put it on the list or pick a different one from her huge repertoire instead.
1. In his Introduction, Greg Johnson describes Joyce Carol Oates’s focus on “the inner lives of her three protagonists and the manifold ways in which their innocence and humanity are slowly eroded by the soul-destroying forces of Detroit” (p. xii). What are these “soul destroying sources”? What strengths do each of these characters–Loretta, and her children Maureen and Jules–draw on, in order to survive their challenging circumstances? All of the three primary characters have the ability to hold onto a vision of a better possible future for themselves through much of the book. Even when Jules is left hollow he is eventually able to fill a touch of himself back up with thoughts of a "new life" as he heads toward California. This I believe is their strength and it comes close to straightforward perseverance. The soul destroying forces are, as George mentions, crushing poverty and the fact that there is no obvious way out of the crushing poverty because of the class divide that keeps them in their place.
2. According to Oates, the original title of them was “Love and Money.” What does love mean to the central characters of the novel? Do the women view it differently from the men? Do any characters exhibit sexual behavior that you would expect to find in someone of the opposite gender?
There is very little love in this story. Loretta loves something about Jules and when Maureen isn't able to move, something about her being helpless. Loretta perceives men as a way to structure her life and she accepts them being around, she is thankful that Howard "saved" her but she does not love him. Jules is obsessed not unlike a lovesick woman but he certainly has a completely masculine way of showing it. Maureen gives up on being good in order to get money and when that fails her utterly, she goes after a man she hopes will give her a baby to love and some security but she does not know if she can ever love him.
3. What part does money play in the novel? What does it represent to Maureen?
Money is what they don't have and the thing which prescribes their life choices. Maureen realizes she can not get out of the chaotic, noisy house without some money of her own and she gives herself up to finding money in order to have choices....
4. Describe the roles that Maureen, Jules, and Betty play in the Wendall family. Is Maureen a typical middle child? How much influence do Loretta and Howard have in reinforcing each sibling’s position? As the children grow up, do their traditional roles change at all?
Children tend to find their place in sibling orders by being different than their other siblings. If the first born is energetic, fearless and full of potential then you can see how Maureen leaned into being calm, good, quiet and full of fear. Betty was born wild and allowed to continue to be. Her mother barely disciplined her because Loretta realized early on that it would not do any good. Loretta screamed at Betty but she screamed at all of them. Maureen, on the other hand, Loretta thought she could control a bit more. Both Jules and Maureen eventually lose themselves while Betty, the wild one, is more like Loretta....she just continues on.
5. Author and literary critic Alfred Kazin wrote, “Oates is unlike many women writers in her feeling for the pressure, mass, density of violent American experience not known to the professional middle class.” Do you agree? What motivates characters such as Brock, Nadine, and Furlong to commit violent acts?
Oates certainly is able to make the reader feel the weight of loss, the tension of almost being able to get out but never actually being able to get out, the deep confusion of not knowing yourself or your place in the world....over and over and over she has her characters ask "what is going on?" or "I can't understand this" or"tell me about yourself" and "there is nothing to tell". Blank, hollow and empty lives are presented in our primary characters and the secondary characters Brock, Nadine, Furlong, equally lost, act out against this hollowness. Brock and Nadine had a similar response in that they appeared to be attempting to kill themselves and yet turned their violence on others to get clarity and to seal their own death. Furlong, appeared to express simple rage with his violence.
6. Maureen struggles to further her education despite her poor grades, and Jules fantasizes about going to college. Why is education so important to them?
Like money, it is seen as a way out. It is seen as a way of being given choices rather than no choices. It adds to the potential of hope.
7. “[Jules] was immensely grateful for being white,” writes Oates. “In Detroit, being white struck him as a special gift . . . Only in a nightmare might he bring his hands up to his face and see colored skin. Negro skin, a hopeless brown nothing could get off, not even a razor” (p. 360). Using examples from the novel, describe how Oates portrays the racial mix in Detroit and the growing tensions leading up to the 1967 riot. Which characters in the novel clearly come from a particular social class, and where do the Wendalls fit on the social ladder?
Wendalls are confused for being "white trash", which in Detroit is seen as anyone coming in from Kentucky or the south. However, Wendalls are simply lower class. They are not even working class as they by and large do not really work although that is partially because they are uneducated and partially because their lives keep pulling them away from the solid jobs that they occasionally get. The racial mix in Detroit is first presented as something fearful and at least a couple blocks away....and as the story continues, the races begin to mix both because the Wendalls fall further and further into neighborhoods where only the very poor live and the racial tensions come out onto the streets. Loretta hates anyone not white and Maureen fears anyone not white but Jules and Betty do not seem to harbor as much fear or hatred. In this book, we do not get to see working class black neighborhoods which Detroit had at the time. We see the warehouse, the express ways, the crumbling buildings, the falling into slums, contrasted by the brick mansions of Gross Pointe.
8. After the Detroit riot, a television camera captures Jules saying, “Fire burns and does its duty” (pp. 532—33). What do you think he means?
It is the nature of fire to burn. It is doing what it is meant to do. Jules seems to be saying that it is inevitable that humans will destroy everything that they have built.
9. Why do you think Oates put a somewhat autobiographical character named Joyce Carol Oates into her novel, and what do you make of this innovative choice? Can you think of other contemporary examples of writers putting themselves into their novels, in a fictionalized form?
I can not think of another example but I am pretty sure I have come across this before. This was handled in a very unique way however. It is not a mere cameo, the night school teacher plays a part in Maureen's life, in effect, ending a piece of hope in it. The fact that Maureen hates the night school teacher makes us think that the character Maureen hates her own creator for making her such an empty vessel.
10. In her 1969 Author’s Note, a section she would later characterize (in her 2000 Afterword) as a playful piece of fiction, Oates wrote, “Nothing in the novel has been exaggerated in order to increase the possibility of drama–indeed, the various sordid and shocking events of slum life, detailed in other naturalistic works, have been understated here, mainly because of my fear that too much reality would become unbearable” (p. xxiv) What was your reaction to this powerfully graphic narrative? Did you find it realistic? Understated? Sensational?
I think the novel did offer up a clear vision of a reality experienced in urban America. I felt that much of the loss of any sense of self in the novel was realistically portrayed even though the way that this was done was not by sharing with us realistic dialogue or realistic events. Oates was attempting to get to a realistic foundation through a fictional construct and I did not find it understated or sensational. However, I also did not think it was a masterpiece. Many people do. I found it flawed by being so formless in the beginning and as it gathered form, exactly when the characters lose all form of themselves, I found much of the interactions to be so blank, so hollow, so empty that it was simply irritating. The trip Jules and Nadine launch into did not ring true other than her leaving. The race riots at the end rang very true but our professor of sociology made me groan and pulled me very hard out of the story. I did find it was what I would characterize as sure footed writing.
1. As already mentioned, their poverty and inability to strive in a job in order to get a better one. There are no role models for improvement. Their aspirations are circumscribed. Loretta is optimistic despite having little energy (where does she get the money for alcohol?) Maureen is conscientious and thoughtful and Jules is imaginiative.2. They all seek love but have few realistic ideas of what that might mean. I didn't detect great differences between the genders, except for Loretta's love for her children when they were dependent. Men were less involved with children.
3. Money is important, but getting it, keeping it and using it to grow one's independence is not part of their lives. When they all, at one time or another, see how more affluent people live they are astounded.
4. Jules is allowed to run wild but he nevertheless does care for his family when he is young and sends money home when he is in Texas but becomes indifferent as he gets older. Maureen is a dutiful daughter who runs the household until she grows dispirited with her prospects and resorts to prostitution. After her recovery she decides that happiness will happen when she persuades her lecturer to leave his family for her. The reality of the financial struggle later sours this dream and she repulses her family. Betty was uncontrollable, or nobody tried to influence her. She hardly belonged to the family at all. Loretta was a passive parent, whose parenting style was to shout at her children when they were around, but who never seemed to actually engage with them and what might interest them. All because she was not cared for herself.
5. It is difficult to gauge whether Oates has a special affinity for describing violence from the outside, because looking at America from elsewhere the violence is inexplicable. I cannot imagine what motivated either Brock or Nadine. Especially Nadine.
6. Both had an idealised and unrealistic attitude to education. They only had the vaguest idea of what tertiary education entailed, but they still strived for it.
7. What is striking is that there were no black characters until the riot. The characters' attitudes to other ethnicities, Polish as well as black, was despisal and fear. The Wendells were poor, but both Jules and Maureen met middle class people.
8. Jules was a mild pyromaniac, so the quote that he read and misunderstood resonated with him. His television interview was incoherent. Who would know what he meant!
9. I am sure I have read others but cannot recollect them. The point Oates is making, I think, is that the power of fiction is lost on people who do not have an interest or abiity to read. Maureen is puzzled by the character Oates saying that literature gives form to life. This is beyond her experience and inexplicable to her.
10. The graphic bits were powerful, especially the description of the riot, but I was impatient with Oates' surreal descriptions of Jules and Maureen's inner dialogue, especially when involved with sex. I found her reaching too far to describe mental aberrations, which left me bored.
1. In his Introduction, Greg Johnson describes Joyce Carol Oates’s focus on “the inner lives of her three protagonists and the manifold ways in which their innocence and humanity are slowly eroded by the soul-destroying forces of Detroit” (p. xii). What are these “soul destroying sources”? What strengths do each of these characters–Loretta, and her children Maureen and Jules–draw on, in order to survive their challenging circumstances?As others have mentioned, the soul destroying forces are hardships brought on by social and economic inequality. In terms of strengths, they all clung to hopes of a better life and had the ability to survive difficult circumstances.
2. According to Oates, the original title of them was “Love and Money.” What does love mean to the central characters of the novel? Do the women view it differently from the men? Do any characters exhibit sexual behavior that you would expect to find in someone of the opposite gender?
I don't care for either title, personally. The characters all seemed to have dysfunctional views on love and ways of showing it.
3. What part does money play in the novel? What does it represent to Maureen?
It plays a big role, since money is something they don't have. I was impressed when Jules had two separate opportunities to walk away with large sums of money earlier on, but chose the honest route. For Maureen, it is a way out of her current situation.
6. Maureen struggles to further her education despite her poor grades, and Jules fantasizes about going to college. Why is education so important to them?
Again, it is a means of escaping the vicious cycle of poverty.
7. “[Jules] was immensely grateful for being white,” writes Oates. “In Detroit, being white struck him as a special gift . . . Only in a nightmare might he bring his hands up to his face and see colored skin. Negro skin, a hopeless brown nothing could get off, not even a razor” (p. 360). Using examples from the novel, describe how Oates portrays the racial mix in Detroit and the growing tensions leading up to the 1967 riot. Which characters in the novel clearly come from a particular social class, and where do the Wendalls fit on the social ladder?
The Wendalls are at the bottom of the white "hierarchy" and part of a socioeconomic class that prevents them from living in more segregated surroundings and being part of the "White Flight". This puts them closer to the racial tensions of the city as time progresses.
9. Why do you think Oates put a somewhat autobiographical character named Joyce Carol Oates into her novel, and what do you make of this innovative choice? Can you think of other contemporary examples of writers putting themselves into their novels, in a fictionalized form?
I initially found this self-indulgent and have seen this technique in a few other 1001 books. I really like Gail's response. It makes a lot of sense.
10. In her 1969 Author’s Note, a section she would later characterize (in her 2000 Afterword) as a playful piece of fiction, Oates wrote, “Nothing in the novel has been exaggerated in order to increase the possibility of drama–indeed, the various sordid and shocking events of slum life, detailed in other naturalistic works, have been understated here, mainly because of my fear that too much reality would become unbearable” (p. xxiv) What was your reaction to this powerfully graphic narrative? Did you find it realistic? Understated? Sensational?
I think much of it is accurate. There were quite a few far-fetched and overly coincidental parts, however.
Mod
1. In his Introduction, Greg Johnson describes Joyce Carol Oates’s focus on “the inner lives of her three protagonists and the manifold ways in which their innocence and humanity are slowly eroded by the soul-destroying forces of Detroit” (p. xii). What are these “soul destroying sources”? What strengths do each of these characters–Loretta, and her children Maureen and Jules–draw on, in order to survive their challenging circumstances?
Poverty and a dysfunctional family are the “soul destroying forces of Detroit.” Loretta is the strong and independent woman who keeps her family afloat by being in charge. Jules leaves home and finds his own way through hard work and connections. Maureen tried to survive by getting good grades but when that did not work turns to money for solace.
2. According to Oates, the original title of them was “Love and Money.” What does love mean to the central characters of the novel? Do the women view it differently from the men? Do any characters exhibit sexual behavior that you would expect to find in someone of the opposite gender?
Loretta fell in love as a teenager but then he is shot in bed with her. Loretta is practical and marries someone else who will take care of her as she had no place to go. Maureen exhibits behavior of the opposite sex as she sees money has power. She is emotionally unattached to her sexual partner. Jules falls head over heels for Nadine and acts like a love sick puppy where as Nadine is completely unattached to love especially her family.
3. What part does money play in the novel? What does it represent to Maureen? Poverty, lack of money, is the central part of the novel.
Maureen turns to money when her mother and step father refuse to let her work.
1. Soul destroying - poverty, lack of education, corruption and the treatment of women. Jules if you ask me his is a sociopath. Maureen does what she needs to do to survive. Betty a rebel and the other one who knows.
2. Maureen - love is a way to escape life. Loretta love is support. Jules love is possession. Betty probably behaves in a way perceived at the time as masculine.
3. Everything really revolves around money for Maureen money will allow her to have some control and to escape her life.
4. Maureen I would say acts like a mini mother as a child she is the most responsible, most conformist and most worried about opinion. Jules is the typical spoilt only son. Betty typical younger child allowed to run free.
5. No I don't agree I think this type of violent behaviour can be seen across society and it can occur for a variety of reasons drink, anger, control and manipulation being some of them we see in the novel.
6. As a means of escape from their poor background.
7. Nadine is clearly privileged. The Wendall's I see as lower class but not the lowest but I don't really know how class works in America.
8. Fire destroys so that things can be build anew.
9. Oates explains this is her afterword about making a different historical Oates someone who is and isn't her to show that you can write what you know while still writing fiction. Stephen King does this a lot and I love it.
10. Unpopular opinion here - I found it boring I didn't like a single character and I couldn't believe one family could have that many dysfunctional members.
2. Maureen - love is a way to escape life. Loretta love is support. Jules love is possession. Betty probably behaves in a way perceived at the time as masculine.
3. Everything really revolves around money for Maureen money will allow her to have some control and to escape her life.
4. Maureen I would say acts like a mini mother as a child she is the most responsible, most conformist and most worried about opinion. Jules is the typical spoilt only son. Betty typical younger child allowed to run free.
5. No I don't agree I think this type of violent behaviour can be seen across society and it can occur for a variety of reasons drink, anger, control and manipulation being some of them we see in the novel.
6. As a means of escape from their poor background.
7. Nadine is clearly privileged. The Wendall's I see as lower class but not the lowest but I don't really know how class works in America.
8. Fire destroys so that things can be build anew.
9. Oates explains this is her afterword about making a different historical Oates someone who is and isn't her to show that you can write what you know while still writing fiction. Stephen King does this a lot and I love it.
10. Unpopular opinion here - I found it boring I didn't like a single character and I couldn't believe one family could have that many dysfunctional members.
Winner of the National Book Award, them is an enthralling novel about love, class, race, and the inhumanity of urban life. It is, raves The New York Times, "a superbly accomplished vision".
Them is the third novel in the Wonderland Quartet. The books that complete this acclaimed series, A Garden of Earthly Delights, Expensive People, and Wonderland, are also available from the Modern Library.