Definately an interesting read and not something I would normallylook at. Can't say I "enjoyed"it- more like experienced it I guess. Reading it a chapter or two at a time and really thinking about it has made it more real than even my normally active imagination needs so it is like going on a trip to where ever it takes place and being there. I have moved along to the Alchemist and found that much more to my liking. Lips sealed..;)
-
We are a multilingual website again. Read the notice about this.
-
Understand AI use at MyPTSD: all AI use is explained in our AI help page. AI use is by choice here. It exists if you want it, but does nothing unless you choose to use it.
The Tigers Wife: A Novel
- Post starter anthony
- Start date
- Status
KP the nut
VIP Member
Still a few pages to go before the Alchemist.
The apocathary has just been hanged. My thought on the chapter was 'what the f*ck has this to do with the story'?
Hopefully I'll finish it tomorrow or Monday.
The apocathary has just been hanged. My thought on the chapter was 'what the f*ck has this to do with the story'?
That about sums it up.
Hopefully I'll finish it tomorrow or Monday.
- Post starter
- Admin
- #99
anthony
Founder
I like these 10 questions they have included at the back for book clubs, so I have included them below with my answers.
Natalia says that the key to her grandfather's life and death "lies between two stories: the story of the tiger's wife, and the story of the deathless man." What power do the stories we tell about ourselves have to shape our identity and help us understand ourselves?
I think they have an influence upon who we are, though I do not feel they are a complete assessment of ourselves. Personality is defined from the moment we're born, every interaction we have with our environment and other beings (human or animal). I guess our recollections of our history helps us maybe define some status, some aspect about ourselves that maybe we find a highlight or interesting. My life has simply taken far too many turns and twists. I think life today is a lot harder to define from stories compared to the time of when this story was based, when life was just much simpler and one could define or live for a handful of aspects that they found defined themselves.
Which of the different ways the characters go about making peace with the dead felt familiar from your own life? Which took you by surprise?
I cannot recollect if any of them ignored death as a method of dealing. Maybe Zora! The last funeral I've been to is my brothers, near 23 - 24 years ago now. It wasn't so much his loss that made me ignore death, as I dealt with that and accepted it, though what changed me was what I saw and did on operations with the military. Death was no longer individual, but collective and people slaughtered. There was simply overwhelming grief that one could not deal with the overload of it.
The one that took me by surprise was the grandfather killing the bear accidentally in the mountains when chasing after the tigers wife. He carried that with him his entire life without it being emphasised elsewhere. Sounds familiar from my view and experience with death.
Natalia believes that her grandfather's memories of the village apothecary "must have been imperishable." What lesson do you think he might have learned from what happened to the apothecary?
Didn't pay enough attention to this I guess to remember his demise.
What significance does the tiger have to the different characters in the novel: Natalia, her grandfather, the tiger's wife, the villagers? Why do you think Natalia's grandfathers's reaction to the tiger's appearance in the village was so different than the rest of the villagers?
I think Natalia admires the tigers courage, the grandfather is intrigued by it, the tigers wife found a bond with something that could be violent, yet treated her with such compassion when her own husband did not and the villagers where scared because they feared anything they couldn't understand.
I think the grandfather always had that doctors curiosity of healing, right from a child, whilst caution was present, he wasn't afraid to accept new things, such as the tiger or the relationship with the tiger's wife. He accepted what was as a child, yet changed with age and medical training, when he fought to accept what was the deathless man later in life, yet by older age and his last encounter with him, he came to accept again what he was, thus his manner once again changed in later life to be more open to things that could not always be explained through science.
"The story of this war - dates, names, who started it, why - that belongs to everyone," Natalia's grandfather tells her. But "those moments you keep to yourself" are more important. By eliding place names and specific events of recent Balkan history, what do you think the author is doing?
I looked up the authors biography, "Téa Obreht was born in 1985 in the former Yugoslavia, and spent her childhood in Cyprus and Egypt before eventually immigrating to the United States in 1997." I found it interesting that she had to have that former connection to Yugoslavia in order to write this book, even though she based it primarily on parents and grandparents information who lived through wars, depending on when she immigrated to the US, she may have experienced the 91 - 95 war to some degree, or she experienced it second hand after immigration through relationships with those who were still in Yugoslavia.
There is a connection, yet her and her grandfather seem to possess a blameless attitude to all parties concerned, and more focused on uniting to work together as bordered countries for the common good of all.
When the deathless man and the grandfather share a last meal before the bombing of Sarobor, the grandfather urges the deathless man to tell the waiter his fate so he can go home and be with his family. Is Gavran Gaile right to decide to stop telling people that they are going to die? Would you rather know your death was coming or go "in suddenness"?
Putting all the superstition aside and the reactions from those he told upon him, trying to kill him, lock him away, etc... his experiences told him people don't know how to handle knowing when they're going to die.
Me, I agree that he should not tell people, because it puts panic into most at their last minutes instead of just going about their lives, living as they define themselves. I think he did the right thing.
Did knowing about Luka's past make him more sympathetic? Why do you think the author might have chosen to give the back stories of Luka, Darisa the Bear, and the apothecary?
Knowing about Luka's past allowed me to understand his change in behaviour, however; I did not become sympathetic to him for beating his wife, regardless the circumstances. He had lots of options he could have taken. He could have just left her and abandoned her, that would be far less painless than what he did to her through beatings.
I think the provision of the underlying stories was a nice touch to keep the story from being predictable. At no stage could I predict what was going to happen in the next chapter, as it was one of those books that started at the end and worked towards the beginning and then shift backwards again. It filled in some nice blanks based on the way the story was done, especially considering the authors age at writing... I agree with her reviews, extremely compelling and mature for her age.
The copy of The Jungle Book Natalia's grandfather always carries around in his coat pocket is not among the possessions she collects after his death. What do you think happens to it?
I think the deathless man arrived and collected upon his debt that the grandfather promised to the deathless man upon his death.
The novel moves back and forth between myth and modern-day "real life." What did you think of the juxtaposition of folklore and contemporary realism?
I found it fascinating to be honest. I have never read a book like that, and it is not something I would I read otherwise. I learnt things from reading this book, about folklore, myth, how they can be incorporated well within reading. These are things one tends to forget about in modern-day life with technology and advancement... we forget history. I liked feeling a sense of history that things exist in some places that cannot be explained, yet exist nonetheless.
Of all the themes of this novel - war, storytelling, family, death, myth, etc. - which one resonate the most with you?
I understand war and death. It even reminded me a little of myth that I encountered from locals in remote parts of the world who still believe quite strongly in myth. They have rituals upon death, even though such things cannot be proven, they also cannot be disproven, yet if people find comfort in the ritual, is it wrong when it brings no harm to another? I think not. The family certainly seems together, yet dysfunctional at times. Reminds me a bit of my own family... closeness, yet dysfunctional and we like our space, yet we can communicate well in doses.
Natalia says that the key to her grandfather's life and death "lies between two stories: the story of the tiger's wife, and the story of the deathless man." What power do the stories we tell about ourselves have to shape our identity and help us understand ourselves?
I think they have an influence upon who we are, though I do not feel they are a complete assessment of ourselves. Personality is defined from the moment we're born, every interaction we have with our environment and other beings (human or animal). I guess our recollections of our history helps us maybe define some status, some aspect about ourselves that maybe we find a highlight or interesting. My life has simply taken far too many turns and twists. I think life today is a lot harder to define from stories compared to the time of when this story was based, when life was just much simpler and one could define or live for a handful of aspects that they found defined themselves.
Which of the different ways the characters go about making peace with the dead felt familiar from your own life? Which took you by surprise?
I cannot recollect if any of them ignored death as a method of dealing. Maybe Zora! The last funeral I've been to is my brothers, near 23 - 24 years ago now. It wasn't so much his loss that made me ignore death, as I dealt with that and accepted it, though what changed me was what I saw and did on operations with the military. Death was no longer individual, but collective and people slaughtered. There was simply overwhelming grief that one could not deal with the overload of it.
The one that took me by surprise was the grandfather killing the bear accidentally in the mountains when chasing after the tigers wife. He carried that with him his entire life without it being emphasised elsewhere. Sounds familiar from my view and experience with death.
Natalia believes that her grandfather's memories of the village apothecary "must have been imperishable." What lesson do you think he might have learned from what happened to the apothecary?
Didn't pay enough attention to this I guess to remember his demise.
What significance does the tiger have to the different characters in the novel: Natalia, her grandfather, the tiger's wife, the villagers? Why do you think Natalia's grandfathers's reaction to the tiger's appearance in the village was so different than the rest of the villagers?
I think Natalia admires the tigers courage, the grandfather is intrigued by it, the tigers wife found a bond with something that could be violent, yet treated her with such compassion when her own husband did not and the villagers where scared because they feared anything they couldn't understand.
I think the grandfather always had that doctors curiosity of healing, right from a child, whilst caution was present, he wasn't afraid to accept new things, such as the tiger or the relationship with the tiger's wife. He accepted what was as a child, yet changed with age and medical training, when he fought to accept what was the deathless man later in life, yet by older age and his last encounter with him, he came to accept again what he was, thus his manner once again changed in later life to be more open to things that could not always be explained through science.
"The story of this war - dates, names, who started it, why - that belongs to everyone," Natalia's grandfather tells her. But "those moments you keep to yourself" are more important. By eliding place names and specific events of recent Balkan history, what do you think the author is doing?
I looked up the authors biography, "Téa Obreht was born in 1985 in the former Yugoslavia, and spent her childhood in Cyprus and Egypt before eventually immigrating to the United States in 1997." I found it interesting that she had to have that former connection to Yugoslavia in order to write this book, even though she based it primarily on parents and grandparents information who lived through wars, depending on when she immigrated to the US, she may have experienced the 91 - 95 war to some degree, or she experienced it second hand after immigration through relationships with those who were still in Yugoslavia.
There is a connection, yet her and her grandfather seem to possess a blameless attitude to all parties concerned, and more focused on uniting to work together as bordered countries for the common good of all.
When the deathless man and the grandfather share a last meal before the bombing of Sarobor, the grandfather urges the deathless man to tell the waiter his fate so he can go home and be with his family. Is Gavran Gaile right to decide to stop telling people that they are going to die? Would you rather know your death was coming or go "in suddenness"?
Putting all the superstition aside and the reactions from those he told upon him, trying to kill him, lock him away, etc... his experiences told him people don't know how to handle knowing when they're going to die.
Me, I agree that he should not tell people, because it puts panic into most at their last minutes instead of just going about their lives, living as they define themselves. I think he did the right thing.
Did knowing about Luka's past make him more sympathetic? Why do you think the author might have chosen to give the back stories of Luka, Darisa the Bear, and the apothecary?
Knowing about Luka's past allowed me to understand his change in behaviour, however; I did not become sympathetic to him for beating his wife, regardless the circumstances. He had lots of options he could have taken. He could have just left her and abandoned her, that would be far less painless than what he did to her through beatings.
I think the provision of the underlying stories was a nice touch to keep the story from being predictable. At no stage could I predict what was going to happen in the next chapter, as it was one of those books that started at the end and worked towards the beginning and then shift backwards again. It filled in some nice blanks based on the way the story was done, especially considering the authors age at writing... I agree with her reviews, extremely compelling and mature for her age.
The copy of The Jungle Book Natalia's grandfather always carries around in his coat pocket is not among the possessions she collects after his death. What do you think happens to it?
I think the deathless man arrived and collected upon his debt that the grandfather promised to the deathless man upon his death.
The novel moves back and forth between myth and modern-day "real life." What did you think of the juxtaposition of folklore and contemporary realism?
I found it fascinating to be honest. I have never read a book like that, and it is not something I would I read otherwise. I learnt things from reading this book, about folklore, myth, how they can be incorporated well within reading. These are things one tends to forget about in modern-day life with technology and advancement... we forget history. I liked feeling a sense of history that things exist in some places that cannot be explained, yet exist nonetheless.
Of all the themes of this novel - war, storytelling, family, death, myth, etc. - which one resonate the most with you?
I understand war and death. It even reminded me a little of myth that I encountered from locals in remote parts of the world who still believe quite strongly in myth. They have rituals upon death, even though such things cannot be proven, they also cannot be disproven, yet if people find comfort in the ritual, is it wrong when it brings no harm to another? I think not. The family certainly seems together, yet dysfunctional at times. Reminds me a bit of my own family... closeness, yet dysfunctional and we like our space, yet we can communicate well in doses.
As far as "those moments you keep to yourself"- I used to share with everyone unique or good things that happened to me because they were so rare and so special, they felt like gifts and I felt so fortunate to be chosen to have them. I have since learned it is peoples nature to be jealous or want have a piece of whatever it is for themselves so I stopped sharing these special things except with those few who truly understood how grateful I was for them. Telling about the elephant would have done the elephant most likely more harm than good so just enjoy the specialness of the moment and remember it in those dark times is what I took from that comment.
- Post starter
- Admin
- #103
anthony
Founder
@KP the nut manages the book club... and I'm pretty sure she keeps the current months book stickie'd in the social forum.
- Status
Donation drives
Trending content
-
-
What Are You Feeling Today? Not Thinking, Rather Feeling! Can You Identify Yours?
- goingonhope
Comments: 34K -
-
-
-
