There is no Frigate like a Book
To take us Lands away
Nor any Coursers like a Page
Of prancing Poetry--
This Traverse may the poorest take
Without oppress of Toll--
How frugal is the Chariot
That bears the Human Soul--

-Emily Dickinson


November, 2010. This is when I had an epiphany that I knew nothing about literature. What exactly prompted this revelation, I don't remember. But what I did after that was print off "BBC's Top 100 Books" list in order to expand my horizons. (Although I'm aware that there are plenty of books omitted from the list, as well as new books constantly being published, this is intended simply to help me be acquainted with literature.) I challenged myself to read all of the books on the list. One year later, I've realized it will take much longer than expected. With only 7 of the 100 books read, this task seems daunting and unrealistic. While some may think it's somewhat masochistic, some may think it's an admirable goal. I guess it depends on the book I'm reading. Frequently I'll read a book that is not on this long list. I used to apologize for it, but I'm assuming hardly anyone reads it anyways.

I started by critiquing the books and authors, but the purpose for writing has changed over the years. The purpose of this blog isn't necessarily to write reviews for the benefit of high school procrastinators or for eagerly researching book-readers or for really anyone besides me. It's a documentation of my own progress as a learner and a reader, as well as being wonderfully cathartic. Books elicit an emotional response, which allows me to explore my own beliefs about life and spirituality.

As of Sunday, June 21st, 2015, I have read twenty-six books on the list. This is hopefully subject to change, and will be updated regularly...or more accurately, as regularly as I finish a book, which isn't always regular.


Thursday, June 11, 2015

The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time - Mark Haddon

Read Twenty-Fifth June 11th, 2015.

It's not exactly a title that rolls off the tongue very well. Which makes sense because it's from the perspective of a fifteen year-old boy with behavioral problems named Christopher. He's very smart; he exceeds mostly everyone around him in math and science and proves it by explaining how he does complicated math problems in his head in order to calm himself down. His understanding of things literal and logical transcends normality. What he doesn't understand is emotion. Certain things simply don't make sense to him, such as why people tell lies, even if for the sake of the hearer's mood. He doesn't understand the effect that his own actions has on other people. No one blames him for any of the things he does, no one that understands his condition, that is.

I felt like the main theme was innocence. He had no ill-thoughts. He was a boy who never intended to hurt anyone, although he did just that to protect himself. His purity was attractive to me. The novel starts with him investigating the murder of a dog across the street named Wellington. He wanted to uncover the secret because he loves dogs more than people, because dogs are simple and they don't confuse him with an array of emotions he doesn't understand. His respect for basic morals was heart-warming, like how much he cared about this dog and how much he didn't like lying. 

However, as his investigation progresses, he discovers more than he had intended. He discovers secrets about his family that makes your heart churn, as well as the mystery of the dog's murder. His attempts to protect himself from these truths ends up hurting people who love him very much. He doesn't notice how difficult he makes things for his parents, but the reader can. In the end, he still only seems to care about himself. That doesn't make him prideful or selfish, but merely naive and innocent.

I don't think that this was simply an analysis of a disabled thought process. It's not meant to describe the inner thoughts of children with special needs. What changed in me as I read was how everything we do affects people and how it would do well to be aware of how we treat others. That realization came on two fronts: how people treated Christopher and how Christopher treated other people. Christopher was often upset by outbursts of passion or emotion. He can't understand why people act the way we often do when reacting to our complicated feelings. On the other hand, Christopher often hurts others by his lack of passion and emotion. He doesn't forgive easily, and his failure to show love for people who love him can make them feel hollow. Whichever method we are guilty of, it would be wise to think twice about how we treat others around us.

No comments:

Post a Comment