Jennifer (formerly Eccentric Muse)'s Reviews > Gilead
Gilead (Gilead, #1)
by
by

Jennifer (formerly Eccentric Muse)'s review
bookshelves: for-the-desert-island, the-missionary-position
Jan 05, 2009
bookshelves: for-the-desert-island, the-missionary-position
Faith gets such a bad rap these days. The most egregiously distorted personifications of it stand as paragons: Sarah Palin's hypocritical, dangerous and politicized evangelism; Pat Robertson's venomous, hateful, racist diatribes. Et cetera.
At the foundation of these demonstrations of faith is a lack of any kind of sensible, coherent, thought-through logic. The Palins and Robertsons of the world--and their brand of religious belief and practice--are easily dismissed because the presentation of it is nonsensical to the point of psychosis. They require, on the part of their followers, the complete turning-off of that part of the brain that questions and evaluates. The thinking part of the brain. As a result, thinking comes to be antithetical to Christian belief or any kind of extremist religious belief.
This is not right. I am open-minded enough to know that, even though I don't share it and can't share it, there are many people whose faith is well-founded on a belief system that has been examined, scrutinized, sometimes (often) struggled with. A belief system that includes doubt and fallibility; and also compassion and tolerance for those who don't share it. This is why it's faith, because it includes--not precludes--doubt and questioning.
John Ames, Marilynne Robinson's creation in Gilead, is the latter type of believer, a person of faith which does not preclude either doubt or intellect. In reading this character's thoughts, my eyes were opened again to that kind of believer, one for whom I have ultimate respect. I can't share his world-view, but I can respect it, and here, I can even enjoy it--the beautiful, lyrical, literary examination and presentation of faith.
I've now said more than I wanted to about this book, because this review captures almost precisely my response to it, and far more eloquently than I have so far. (thank you, brian)
Some other things I enjoyed, all of them very subtle:
1) the wry, sneak-up on you humour (very unexpected, but welcome);
2) the imagery of the 'hereafter' -- envisioned as a third dimension, unknowable and indescribable;
3) the presentation of aging (in this, Ames reminds me of Hagar in Laurence's The Stone Angel--another gorgeously evocative depiction of the aging mind);
4) of course, the character and symbolism of "Jack"--what he represents to John Ames, the doubt and struggle with his own faith and adherence to faith-based behaviour that Ames ultimately manages to integrate into his own belief system, and with whom he reconciles, both on a physical 'in-the-world' level as well as a spiritual one.
At the foundation of these demonstrations of faith is a lack of any kind of sensible, coherent, thought-through logic. The Palins and Robertsons of the world--and their brand of religious belief and practice--are easily dismissed because the presentation of it is nonsensical to the point of psychosis. They require, on the part of their followers, the complete turning-off of that part of the brain that questions and evaluates. The thinking part of the brain. As a result, thinking comes to be antithetical to Christian belief or any kind of extremist religious belief.
This is not right. I am open-minded enough to know that, even though I don't share it and can't share it, there are many people whose faith is well-founded on a belief system that has been examined, scrutinized, sometimes (often) struggled with. A belief system that includes doubt and fallibility; and also compassion and tolerance for those who don't share it. This is why it's faith, because it includes--not precludes--doubt and questioning.
John Ames, Marilynne Robinson's creation in Gilead, is the latter type of believer, a person of faith which does not preclude either doubt or intellect. In reading this character's thoughts, my eyes were opened again to that kind of believer, one for whom I have ultimate respect. I can't share his world-view, but I can respect it, and here, I can even enjoy it--the beautiful, lyrical, literary examination and presentation of faith.
I've now said more than I wanted to about this book, because this review captures almost precisely my response to it, and far more eloquently than I have so far. (thank you, brian)
Some other things I enjoyed, all of them very subtle:
1) the wry, sneak-up on you humour (very unexpected, but welcome);
2) the imagery of the 'hereafter' -- envisioned as a third dimension, unknowable and indescribable;
3) the presentation of aging (in this, Ames reminds me of Hagar in Laurence's The Stone Angel--another gorgeously evocative depiction of the aging mind);
4) of course, the character and symbolism of "Jack"--what he represents to John Ames, the doubt and struggle with his own faith and adherence to faith-based behaviour that Ames ultimately manages to integrate into his own belief system, and with whom he reconciles, both on a physical 'in-the-world' level as well as a spiritual one.
Sign into 欧宝娱乐 to see if any of your friends have read
Gilead.
Sign In 禄
Reading Progress
January 5, 2009
– Shelved
January 19, 2010
–
Started Reading
January 27, 2010
–
34.41%
"I continue to be pulled into the stream (of consciousness) of this book's luscious prose and subtle insights."
page
85
January 29, 2010
–
46.56%
"The humour is delightful, in that it is unexpected. And often, dark and quite wry."
page
115
February 18, 2010
–
Finished Reading
February 22, 2010
–
100.0%
"Finished ages ago; too lazy/busy to update my status or write a review. Loved the unique voice and quiet, powerful examination of faith."
page
247
June 24, 2010
– Shelved as:
for-the-desert-island
July 13, 2010
– Shelved as:
the-missionary-position
Comments Showing 1-6 of 6 (6 new)
date
newest »

message 1:
by
Julie
(new)
-
rated it 4 stars
Jan 22, 2010 08:41AM

reply
|
flag


Perhaps Pascal's Wager is an extreme form of this argument, but I don't think you need to go as far as that for it to make sense. You can probably talk about faith in quite mundane things and it will still work. Surely someone has explored this line of reasoning?


Julie, I was thinking of you all the way through this one. I wonder (without getting too personal on a public thread), if your own strong faith almost made this book somehow "unchallenging", i.e. boring, for you. You might be so familiar with the kind of theological musings that Ames engages in, that the lack of plot sunk you. Although as brian points out in his review, too, it's just a gorgeous literary experience and accomplishment.