The Most Dangerous
Revolution….EVER!!!!
Team Bellerose, checking in!:
Jenny
writes: First,
I have to admit that I did not finish reading Most Dangerous. In fact, I
had problems getting through the first thirty pages. I hated the “look” of the text. To me, it was a text that I would give one of
my students who was doing a research paper on Daniel Ellsberg; it reminded me
very much of a textbook. I’m an adult,
an English teacher; I should have buckled down and read it . . . but I just
couldn’t do it.
I did read
Revolution. Although this novel is also about an
important period in American history, I found it interesting. I loved the visuals: the quotations, the song lyrics, the actual
photos of people who were involved in Freedom Day and the Freedom Movement. I also liked the characters in the text. I loved the juxtaposition in character
perspective; I really liked Sunny and Gillette.
I appreciated the fact that they are living in a blended family in
Mississippi in 1964. I found the
conversations between Sunny, Polly, and Mary Margaret to be quite funny at times;
parts of the novel made me laugh out loud.
Conversely, I was afraid when
Sunny was caught in the theatre alone, and I was sickened by the incident at
the hospital.
However, I
did feel that the novel went on a little too long. When I came to the extended essay on Cassius
Clay, I cringed a little; it was interesting, but almost too much that late in
the novel. I also found it a little
contrived that the family just happens to be driving by when several pivotal
moments happen in the text.
Overall, I
did like the book. It was an interesting
mix of fact and fiction. It was about
equality and civil rights; however, I also enjoyed the personal narrative.
Score: Danger: 0
Revolution: 1
Graham
writes: It’s with some reservation and
reticence I begin the process of responding to these books. I suppose it’s
simply because I am unsure of what an appropriate response should look like
(EDITOR’S NOTE: literally, I printed off
responses from old Smackdowns, and I put them in Graham’s hands to read for his
edification. And I printed them IN
COLOUR. Ingrate.—end of EDITOR’S NOTE).
So, (holding my breath) operating with my general lack of good judgment, I
offer my thoughts. I must say I am frankly unmoved by either book
(exhale…).
Revolution: The story carried a deeply valuable message
and spoke to a unique family dynamic, especially for the time. I found Sunny’s
character well developed, age appropriate and forgettable. I enjoyed the retelling of the social
injustices of the time in a way that was meaningful and interesting. The voices
of many who experienced the same event offer many wonderful entry points to
discuss the importance of perspective, truths and the value of story. The use
of imagery was interesting and captured harsh edge of injustice and deep
complexity of being caught in hard choices. I found the story difficult to read,
not because of the writing, but more so due to the distasteful treatment of the
“Other” during the struggle for freedom in 1960s Mississippi. Notwithstanding,
I found the book a long read, and, towards the end, it felt like work. I
suppose as I write this, my feelings about the book are softening, but I just
didn’t feel a mojo that would cause me to endorse this book.
Most Dangerous:
This book also followed a history that I found, personally, both troubling and
interesting. The story carried more revelations (for me) regarding the historic
events of the Vietnam Conflict than the human equality and rights issues
highlighted in Revolution. I found
the story took liberties that at many times read to me more like a convincingly
fabricated historical fiction rather than an embellished retelling of events. I
found the read more along the lines of the Scandal
TV series.
The pictures were again able to capture what text could not
(including terrible fashions of the 60s and 70s). I found the linear
progression and telling of one perspective easier to follow, perhaps with less
depth. I ended up reading the book in one sitting and afterwards was somewhat
enlightened and disappointed. I am not exactly sure what I was hoping for; perhaps
I was expecting Daniel Ellsberg to be less “Snowdenesque.” Yet, in the end, I
would support this book to move forward…
Score: Whistleblowers: 1
Social Injustice: 1
Kelly writes: I did not
know what to expect when I flipped through Deborah Wiles’s book Revolution and saw a large portion of
the book was pictures. The first 40 pages were real-life quotations,
images, posters, pictures of identifiable people and news articles of a time
specifically known as the Freedom Summer. I came to appreciate how it
created a context that I could identify with. I could the feel the chaos,
uncertainty, change and threat of the time, all with the Beatles playing in the
background. Before the fictional story even began, you had a powerful
context for the characters to exist. Using the visuals throughout the
fictional story kept the characters grounded to the facts of the time
period. As the characters experienced the events of the time they became
likable and relevant. I was pleasantly surprised how much I
enjoyed the characters and the story. I fully appreciated the creative
use of visuals and feel that I have a better understanding and appreciation of
the sixties.
I don’t really have anything to say about Most Dangerous. I found it ponderous, and a chore to get
through. It just wasn’t for me
.
Score:
Vietnam: 1
Slightly-earlier-than-Vietnam: 2
Brad writes: I, with every fibre of my being, want to make
this a Survivor-like tie, where we
would implore Deborah Wiles and Steve Sheinkin to, I don’t know, build a fire,
or bind a book, or eat a paperback, in front of all us to see which text will
move forward. But alas…
Most Dangerous, it should come as no surprise,
just didn’t do it for me, despite my fascination with: a) everything from the
Vietnam era, b)conspiracies, and c) that thin edge between whistle-blower and
perceived traitor. I’ve written about my
wariness of non-fiction that reads like fiction (no matter how well-researched)
a lot between Bomb and The Nazi Hunters over the past couple of
years. I find it troubling—I really
do. But I’m not going to rehash it. I did like it better than those other
two. But not more than the other book,
which manages to interweave a fictional story with non-fictive elements without
sacrificing, you know, any sense of veracity.
Deborah
Wiles’ Revolution does all sorts of
great things with form, interspersing a collage of primary texts (song lyrics,
quotations, photographs, biblical passages, headlines) with a fictional
narrative to address the countless types of revolution that occur in a
Mississippi town during the Freedom Summer of 1964: musical, cultural, philosophical, and
racial. There is a lot to unpack
here. A LOT. And that’s what makes Revolution such an engaging and thought-provoking read: images of volunteers teaching at a Freedom
School alongside lyrics to Martha and the Vandellas “Dancing in the Streets.” A
quotation from J.F.K announcing his intention with a civil rights bill
juxtaposed with an excerpt from “Why You Should Join the Ku Klux Klan.” Extended essays that interrupt the flow of
the fictional narrative. There is so
much to teach—one could pretty much flip open to any of the “documentary”
pages, and discuss authorial intent for a whole class: the font, the layout, the placement of the
primary source in relation to the fictional narrative, the interplay between
text and word…super-duper interesting stuff.
The “documentary” sections do more than just establish verisimilitude
and context: they metonymically embody
the revolution of the book’s title and dialectics clash in word and lyric and
image and tone.
I agree
with Jenny that the plot of the fictional narrative sometimes is a bit
circumstantial, but I ended up really liking it anyway—I certainly wasn’t
bored, despite the book’s length. My
biggest concern is that I doubt there are many young readers who would be able
to negotiate this text on their own—the thoughtful and patient hand of a
teacher could really unlock a new world of visual literacy to a student, but
I’m pretty sure a student on his or her own could become frustrated without
some assistance (it is 40 pages in before we even realize there is going to be
a traditional narrative). That, coupled
with the length (and sheer heft!) of this book might scare off some of our
kids. But it shouldn’t. With a little guidance with visual literacy,
and the ways that text and image can sometimes catalyze necessary cognitive
dissonance, this could be a really rich text for our students. I didn’t love
it with unfettered fervour, but I really liked
it.
VICTOR: REVOLUTION
No comments:
Post a Comment