Book Write-Up: Like a Flower in Bloom, by Siri Mitchell

Siri Mitchell.  Like a Flower in Bloom.  Minneapolis: Bethany House Publishers, 2015.  See here for Bethany House’s page about the book.

Charlotte Withersby lives with her father and her cranky housekeeper in nineteenth century England.  Her father is a botanist, and Charlotte collects samples for him, writes and illustrates his books for him, and takes care of his bills and his correspondence.  She loves her work, even though, sadly, she does not get any credit for it.  Her uncle, an admiral who left botany to sail in the Opium Wars, thinks it is time for Charlotte to get married.  Edward Trimble arrives to perform Charlotte’s daily tasks, while Charlotte enters the social scene in search of a husband.  Charlotte resents Mr. Trimble and does not want to get married, so she hatches a plot with her new friend, the social butterfly Miss Templeton, to appear like she’s looking for a husband, in hopes that her father will change his mind and let her come back to her work.  Charlotte manages to get two admirers, notwithstanding her bluntness, her tendency to take things literally, and other social faux pas she commits.  Meanwhile, Mr. Trimble offers her social tips, and we learn in the course of the book where he learned the art of playing the social scene.

Like a Flower in Bloom is narrated in the first person, from Charlotte Withersby’s perspective.  Her manner of narrating is very English, and thus formal and sophisticated.  But she can also be hilarious, at times, especially as she tries to make sense of etiquette and the rules of socializing.  For example, when Mr. Trimble challenges her that her walk is all wrong because she looks like she is in a hurry to get from one place to another, she replies that walking is for that very purpose—-to get from one place to another!  Those who like the TV show Bones will love this book!  Charlotte reminded me a lot of Temperance Brennan!

The dialogue in the book had a sort of Aaron Sorkin feel to it: rapid, witty.  It reminded me somewhat of The Newsroom, especially scenes in the show where people interact with the socially-awkward, and also lovely, Sloan Sabbith.

In a note at the end of the book, the author, Siri Mitchell, comments on botany in the seventeenth-nineteenth centuries, the Opium Wars, and introversion.  Her comments on introversion were especially endearing to me, especially her statement that “Perhaps my novels always speak to questions of worth because so often I doubt my own” (page 361).  Her comments on the history of botany, however, puzzled me a bit, because I had a difficult time making sense of them in terms of the plot of the book.  According to Mitchell, there was a division between people who studied botany to understand God through creation, and people who treated botany as more of a secular discipline.  Mitchell seemed to express a preference for the former theological approach.  The thing is, Charlotte appeared to me to lean more towards the latter approach, focusing on the classification of plants.  Occasionally, Charlotte contemplated the theological significance of botany—-as when she reflected that everything, however strange (strange plants, and herself), has a place in God’s world—-but it seemed to me that she had those kinds of reflections when she was inspired by discussions with others, particularly the rector; left to her own devices, her approach was rather secular.  Later in the book, Charlotte wonders what the meaning of her work is and how it even teaches people about God, and that puzzled me somewhat, since her work prior to that point did not seem to be about theology.  That could be Mitchell’s point: that it should have been.  Even though that passage confused me, it still was important in the story, for it is not surprising that Charlotte’s attitude towards her work would be different when she returns to it after time away.

I should also note that Charlotte becomes more of a feminist, expressing the sorts of sentiments that would appear in Betty Friedan’s The Feminine Mystique.  I consider it a good thing for an evangelical book to express those sentiments.

Notwithstanding my confusion in areas, I am giving this book five stars.  As a person with Asperger’s Syndrome, I appreciated reading Charlotte’s journey to navigate her way through social mazes.  And one of the book’s key themes resonated with me: the theme of accepting people as they are, even if they walk to the beat of a different drummer.

The publisher sent me a complimentary copy of this book in exchange for an honest review.

The Newsroom: "The Greater Fool" (the End of Season 1)

I finished Season 1 of Aaron Sorkin's The Newsroom last night.  I have two reactions, both of which are about the last episode of Season 1, entitled "The Greater Fool."

1.  Will McAvoy is a news anchor, who has recently abandoned his milquetoast style of doing the news in favor of a hard-hitting (and some would say left-leaning) track.  An acquaintance of his, after hanging around the newsroom, has finally written his story about Will in a prominent magazine.  Will is devastated by the article's negativity about him and what he is doing, and he is especially upset that those he respects have said bad things about him.  Will self-medicates and ends up in the hospital, and, while there, he has a nurse whom he fears wants to euthanize him (or so he says jokingly).  Will learns that the African-American grandmother of his nurse will not be able to vote due to a voter ID law in Tennessee, for she does not have a car and thus lacks a driver's license.  The nurse demands that he do a story about that, Will can see the value of such a story, and so that is the top story in his next newscast.

The reason that I loved this part of the episode was that it's easy for me to identify with Will's depression about the rejection that he was experiencing.  And yet, Will was reminded that, even if people rejected him, he had an important mission to perform, a vital story to tell: he was going to expose the unfairness of voter ID laws to whomever would listen.  I'm not saying that having a significant mission can cure everyone's depression, but I wouldn't be surprised if that could help a lot of people.

2.  A famous scene on the first episode is when Will is at a college, and a blonde female college student asks him and the other two speakers to explain "in a sentence or less" why America is the greatest country in the world.  Will responds that it's not, but it used to be.  He also criticizes the lady who asked the question, calling her "sorority girl."

On the last episode of the series, sorority girl is applying to be an intern to work in Will's newsroom.  Will vaguely recognizes her at first, and then he realizes who she is.  "You're the one who asked that moronic question about why America is the greatest country in the world," he exclaims.  She soberly replies that she is that person, that she watches his show regularly, and that she thinks that the work that he is doing is important.  Will then requests that she ask her "idiotic" question again: Why is America the best country in the world?  She does so, and Will responds: "You are."  Watch the scene here (there are differences between the scene and my description, since I was writing from memory).

I like that scene because the story of "sorority girl" does not end with Will's sarcastic, holier-than-thou put-down on the first episode of the series.  But the scene also made me think about something: can putting somebody else down actually encourage him or her to change?  Sometimes it can, and sometimes it does not.  My high school guidance counselor was a liberal, and I (who was a conservative at the time) was debating with him about politics one day.  He said that he used to think like I did, but when he was a teen he went to Washington, D.C. with a group of students and met his congressman, a Democrat.  He was criticizing the Congressman for voting for Medicare, and the congressman responded, "If that's how you feel, then you should go home and pray for your soul!"  The congressman's words had an effect on my guidance counselor, and, in the next election, my guidance counselor voted for the congressman.

Sometimes people are jarred out of their complacency or way of looking at things by a timely, strongly-worded remark.  At other times, however, put-downs do not work.  Another character on the Newsroom is pretending to be an Internet troll.  Internet trolls often do not change people's minds.  There are many times when I think back to insults that people on the Internet have hurled at me, and my thought is not, "Oh, I should repent and change my mind," but rather, "You self-righteous jackass" (I'm addressing the troll in my imagination). 

Bullies (an Episode of The Newsroom)

I've been watching the first season of The Newsroom.  It is on HBO, and it was created and is largely written by Aaron Sorkin, who gave us The West Wing.  The Newsroom is about a news program, which is anchored by Will McAvoy, who (along with his producer, an ex-flame) has decided to shift his program from its less-than-serious nature to one that gives the "facts" and asks guests the hard questions.

I like the program because it is inspirational and funny, and McAvoy, while he is clearly an arrogant jerk, is still somehow loveable (as were all of the jerks on The West Wing).  My problem with the show has been that it has presented conservatives as mindless dunces.  When McAvoy has had conservative guests on his show, they usually had this deer-in-the-headlights look.  In my opinion, that is not only unrealistic, but it also does not make for good entertainment.  You may think that conservatives are not particularly bright and that their policies are damaging to the country, but I've seen and read plenty of conservatives who are well-read, who are able to convey an argument, and who do not have that deer-in-the-headlights look whenever they're challenged.  Moreover, it would be more entertaining to me to see McAvoy actually have to engage in rhetorical combat with formidable opponents rather than mowing his guests down on a regular basis.

I saw an exception to the rule in an episode that I watched last night, entitled "Bullies."  McAvoy has on his program an African-American homosexual professor who (surprise!) is an adviser to Republican Presidential candidate Rick Santorum.  In the style of Lawrence O'Donnell, McAvoy ties to mow the professor down with the same questions over and over: How can the professor defend Rick Santorum's comments regarding homosexuality?  The professor meekly replies that Santorum has treated him with the utmost respect over the years, and that he does not agree with everything Santorum has said.  As the professor is continually harangued by McAvoy, however, the professor eventually loses his cool.  The professor fights back, saying that he is not defined by his race, his sexual orientation, or even by McAvoy, who in his narrow-mindedness presumes to know what someone like the professor should believe and do.  The professor says that he does not need McAvoy's help, and that he is supporting Rick Santorum because he believes that Santorum is the best candidate in the race when it comes to protecting the lives of the unborn.

To his credit, McAvoy is silent as he is taken to the woodshed by the professor, but, as is often the case in Sorkin's political dramas, the left gets the last word.  McAvoy then asks the professor if Santorum believes that the professor is fit to teach, and the professor quietly and solemnly responds, "no."

When McAvoy is seeing a therapist, McAvoy eventually acknowledges that he was being a bully in that interview.  McAvoy also remarks that he managed to upset the religious right, African-Americans, and gays in one interview, and I got a laugh out of that!  In any case, I hope that there are more episodes of The Newsroom in which intelligent conservatives fight back----and both sides (if we can truly reduce people to "sides," which is doubtful) end up learning something in the process.

To watch the scene, see here.