Heaven 2022: December Book Club: Little Women (including Good Wives), by Louisa M Alcott
Our December book is Little Women. This is including Good Wives - I believe in the US it's all one book, while it's separated into two books in the UK. Alcott herself didn't call part 2 'Good Wives - that was the publisher's choice.
It can be accessed free on Project Gutenberg, which has both parts in one book: link here
Also, it is 41p on Amazon UK, and again, both parts included: link here
I imagine it's a book a few of us are familiar with from childhood, and also, maybe, from the various film adaptations that have been made. Incidentally, for those who have Netflix, the 2019 adaptation is on there, with Saoirse Ronan as Jo - this is a version that seems to get quite mixed responses. Personally, I really liked it, particularly Florence Pugh's portrayal of Amy.
I always find it interesting to reread a childhood book in adulthood and see how/if my perspective has changed, things I notice that I didn't notice before, etc. I've read this book quite a few times, in childhood and in adulthood, and look forward to reading it again.
I'll post discussion questions on the 20th.
It can be accessed free on Project Gutenberg, which has both parts in one book: link here
Also, it is 41p on Amazon UK, and again, both parts included: link here
I imagine it's a book a few of us are familiar with from childhood, and also, maybe, from the various film adaptations that have been made. Incidentally, for those who have Netflix, the 2019 adaptation is on there, with Saoirse Ronan as Jo - this is a version that seems to get quite mixed responses. Personally, I really liked it, particularly Florence Pugh's portrayal of Amy.
I always find it interesting to reread a childhood book in adulthood and see how/if my perspective has changed, things I notice that I didn't notice before, etc. I've read this book quite a few times, in childhood and in adulthood, and look forward to reading it again.
I'll post discussion questions on the 20th.
Comments
Ah, interesting - I haven't thought much about that aspect. Reading your comment made me wonder where in the US the story is set, and I found this on Wikipedia:
I'm realising I had no idea they lived in Massachusetts, nor a new new neighbourhood, but it must say so in the novel.
I must dig out my treasured copy, which belonged to my mother and has the most beautiful silhouette illustrations. Although I'm in the UK, this version has both books in one, which is interesting. My first encounter with the book(s) was in two volumes, those abridged hardback ones which were so popular in the 70s. Mum read them to me before I was old enough to read them for myself, but since she didn't attempt American accents, it was a long time before I realised they were set in America!
The book is close to my heart, and the most recent film version made me want to stand up and cheer in the middle of the cinema. I got the DVD for my birthday, and now I need to watch it again!
I've been putting off watching the 2019 film until the time seemed right so will probably do that this month.
Having been a fan, and repeat reader, since the mid fifties I have a very definite 'screenplay' running through my head, and that most recent film version caused me much confusion.
I will admit that I have seen various TV & film versions over the years, and the 'film in my head' is now peopled with a selection of individual characters from past castings.
I must see if I can find the book/s at the library and join in.
I think that's a very individual thing. I have watched many film adaptations of books I've loved, and my responses have ranged from loving the film and feeling that it added layers of enjoyment and meaning to the book, to thinking the film was terrible and totally misrepresented the point of the book. (There are even a few cases where I think movie is better!). However, I've never felt that a movie "ruined the experience" of a book for me -- the book, and my memories of it (and the ability to reread and enjoy it anew) still exists for me, quite independent of a bad film adaptation or even a good one.
We'd not heard of the Draft Riots either, probably because they formed a minor sideline to the Civil War. Even that was not a major part of history education in 50's and 60's Australia. The Ship continues its role of opening bylines and pathways.
My sisters and I disliked the books intensely, but looking back now I can see why they appealed to US girls when they were written and probably for a century afterwards.
Unfortunately I have lent my copy of "Little Women" to my daughter and have done the reread in a different copy in which there is at least one key omission - just a couple of lines, but it really bugged me when I came across it.
I've also seen what I believe to be the most recent film and it will be interesting to discuss that when the time comes.
It's been some years since I actually read it, but this 'memory' has just popped into my mind on reading HarryCH's post. I've never seen that bit in any of the film or tv productions
Felt like slapping sanctimonious old Marmee with a dead fish even then
@Sojourner I didn't like the book when I read it as a child for pretty much the reasons you've mentioned. Now having read loads of Religious Tract Societies novels for children such as Jessica's First Prayer, I can appreciate Little Women a lot more.
@Sarasa, I was interested in what you said about the Religious Tract Society: I'd thought they only issued religious tracts, but obviously they covered fiction too. Were they a big outfit?
Yes, I've always thought they are Bibles. It says they are 'the beautiful old story of the best life ever lived,' which I assume is intended to be that of Jesus, rather than Christian in PP. The sisters know the story of PP, and Marmee says the books are their guidebook, to read from every day, which sounds like it's a Bible to me. It's the teaching in the Bible that inspires PP and their PP game.
I haven't finished reading it yet, but I'm familiar enough with it, having read it a few times in the past. I think for most people here it seems to be a reread too, so people might be interesed in talking about how differently they experiece the book in adulthood, for instance, so I'll write questions about this, while also making them inclusive of anyone reading it for the first time. Hopefully they are broad enough for people to talk about whatever aspect of the book interests them, and if anyone has other questions to add, please do.
I went on to read Little Men and Jo's Boys after reading the first two books a couple of times. I enjoyed them back then, but they don't have the appeal of the first two volumes.
This read through the war stuff seemed to be more important. And is the General Lincoln who sees Meg at the Moffat’s party supposed to be Abraham Lincoln?
Jo was my favourite, as is the case with everyone I've ever discussed it with. I thought Meg was boring and hated Amy, though reading it this time I have more sympathy with her.
My favourite part is when they're waiting for Marmee to come back when Beth is ill, and it turns out Laurie has already sent for her.
I always thought it was a shame Jo didn't end up married to Laurie.
Reading it this time I felt very irritated by the author's "moralising" comments (interesting in view of Jo's struggles with her writing and whether to put in such comments): I feel the moral is, and should be, clear from the story itself.
I've been wondering about Beth: was it just shyness or was there something wrong with her?
Was it a tall red hardback book, with coloured illustrations? I had that when I was seven. I remember the illustration of Amy drawing noses!
One of my favourite memes making the rounds on social media is one that says "The most depressing part of Little Women is not when Beth dies, but when Jo gets paid $100 for a short story, reminding us that rates for freelance writing have remained virtually unchanged since the 1870s" or words to that effect. Given Jo's struggle between what she writes for money and what she wants to write, it is interesting to wonder how much of the moralizing tone of LW/GW and sequels reflects what the author actually wanted to write, and how much of it is what she felt compelled by the literary norms of the day to put in.
I have MANY opinions about this book (or these books, if you have them in two volumes), but to avoid being too long-winded, for anyone interested I'll post a link to a blog post I wrote back in 2011 when I "re-read" it, which actually turned out to be reading it for the first time as I'd never read the unabridged version. I ramble on at length in this post about my lifelong reactions to the novel's two biggest and perhaps most controversial plot points: Beth's fate, and the Jo/Laurie relationship.