Marilynne Robinson: Gilead

I'm not sure I would ever have read this book if my wife had not liked it so much. I had heard of it and knew that it was very highly regarded by critics, but that alone doesn't mean a great deal to me. But while my wife was reading it she read me a few passages that were very impressive. And then when she finished she bought half a dozen copies to give away (used copies, I note, so it was not a huge expense). So I thought with that kind of testimony on record I should move it up higher on my list.

It's as good as she said. It's the sort of book of which I can either say a little or a lot, spending either minutes or hours, and since my free time is limited I'm going to make it minutes. 

Gilead is a novel, but the narrative is pretty slight. It almost seems more like a series of reflections or meditations than a novel, but those reflections are rich and illuminating. I considered marking passages that were especially worthy of remembering, then realized I'd be marking almost every page. I'm quite sure I'll read it again, and there aren't many books of which I'll say that.

Gilead is a small town in Iowa, and the book's narrator is an old man, John Ames, who expects to die soon, and the book takes the form of a sort of journal written to and for his young son, or rather to the grown man that the son will one day be. Ames is a Congregationalist minister, and it was a surprise to me, as it probably would be to many Catholics, that he is in many essential ways very orthodox in his faith. The writing of the journal takes place in the 1950s, and the recounting of his experiences reaches back into the lives of his father and grandfather, both also Congregationalist ministers. The grandfather had moved to Kansas from Maine in the years preceding the Civil War for the purpose of assisting in the fight against slavery, helping escaped slaves and participating in the "direct action," as a modern revolutionary might call it, of John Brown. The intensity of the grandfather's convictions and his disturbingly direct implementation of the demands of the Gospel have effects which reach down into the present day.

In addition to the filling-in of this family history, there are events contemporaneous to the writing of the journal. These involve the very wayward son of a friend (also a minister, but a Lutheran) who was named after Ames, and who presents Ames with certain personal challenges. None of this involves any extremely dramatic events, but it all adds up to a picture of one life and glimpses into others. And I understand that in Robinson's other books these glimpses are expanded–her most recent, Lila, is about Ames's wife–and I'm sure each illuminates the others in many ways. 

Ames's own son is the product of a late and unexpected marriage, and the marriage and child constitute for Ames a blessing unhoped-for and in his mind even unmerited. This is the central fact upon which the most striking thing about the novel is built: a sense of enormous gratitude. Because I don't want to do the work of trying to describe that aspect of it, I opened the book to a random page to see if a passage sufficient to illustrate the point would present itself. That page had some good things, but I knew there were better, so I opened to another random page, and this is what I found:

I'd never have believed I'd see a wife of mine doting on a child of mine. It still amazes me every time I think of it. I'm writing this in part to tell you that if you ever wonder what you've done in your life, and everyone does wonder sooner or later, you have been God's grace to me, a miracle, something more than a miracle. You may not remember me very well at all, and it may seem to you to be no great thing to have been the good child of an old man in a shabby little town you will no doubt leave behind. If only I had the words to tell you.

 

There's a shimmer in a child's hair, in the sunlight. There are rainbow colors in it, tiny, soft beams of just the same colors you can see in the dew sometimes. They're in the petals of flowers, and they're on a child's skin. Your hair is straight and dark, and your skin is very fair. I suppose you're not prettier than most children. You're just a nice-looking boy, a bit slight, well scrubbed and well mannered. All that is fine, but it's your existence I love you for, mainly. Existence seems to me now the most remarkable thing that could ever be imagined. I'm about to put on imperishability. In an instant, in the twinkling of an eye.

The twinkling of an eye. That is the most wonderful expression. I've thought from time to time it was the best thing in life, that little incandescence you see in people whn the charm of a thing strikes them, or the humor of it. "The light of the eyes rejoiceth the heart." That's a fact.

So if you want to figure that the odds of happening on a passage like that on a page chosen randomly suggest that there are many such passages, you'd be right. 

See the simul-post at Janet's blog, which goes into more depth.


,

23 responses to “Marilynne Robinson: Gilead

  1. Yes, there is that gratitude which I didn’t mention.
    I love that bit about “the twinkling of an eye.”
    There’s also a lot in the book about water: dew in this passage, rain in the passage I quoted, a description of the drops of water when the boys are playing in the sprinkler, and Baptism everywhere.
    Re-reading the book after reading Lila will be like reading a different book.
    AMDG
    AMDG

  2. Currently about 2/3 of the way through Lila, and it’s marvelous so far — a truly beautiful book.
    It still amazes me that a novel like Gilead, so thoroughly Christian, could have won the Pulitzer in this day and age.

  3. It is so different from Gilead and again, so much the same. Lila is such a unique character. I basically did nothing else from the time I started reading it until I finished.
    I don’t think it’s finished, though.
    AMDG

  4. I was thinking yesterday, when I wrote this post, that she really hasn’t filled in all that much of what could be a very broad canvas, and wondering, since she’s 70, how much more she would live to do. If that’s her intention, which it seems to be.
    I’m going to put Lila off for a while. Forcing myself to finish Angela’s Ashes, and then have contracted with myself to read Waugh’s Sword of Honour trilogy.

  5. If she continues the Gilead “series” it would not be unlike Wendell Berry’s Port William.
    I put off my contract to reread The Bros K until I read Lila. The latter is shortish, so I figured it’d only set me back a week or two tops.

  6. Of course, then you will have to read Home.
    AMDG

  7. I thought of the Berry/Port William comparison, too. Very similar in many ways beyond the structural.

  8. Marianne

    I picked up Gilead a couple of times shortly after it won the Pulitzer but just couldn’t get into it; don’t remember exactly why. Then about five years ago, I finally read it through and loved it.
    Something I find fascinating is that Robinson wrote it in serial form: “I ended up writing that book like a serial novel. I would write thirty pages or so and then send it to the editor, and then write thirty more pages and send it to the editor.”
    Much of the book felt like poetry to me. Wonder if that serial-like way of producing it contributed to that?

  9. Well, since it was in journal form seems like that would work well.
    AMDG

  10. Also worth reading is Paul Harding’s ‘Tinkers’ which won the Pulitzer in 2010. Rejected by a bunch of publishers it finally found a home with a tiny little not-for-profit, it then went on to “get legs” almost entirely by word-of-mouth. Harding studied with Robinson at Iowa, and it shows somewhat, but his book is nothing like a ‘Gilead’ clone, despite being about a father and son. He’s done a follow-up, ‘Enon,’ but I haven’t read it yet.
    ‘Home’ is very good too. Basically tells one of the sub-stories of ‘Gilead’ from the perspective of Boughton’s daughter, Glory. I read it when it first came out, and it made me want to read ‘Gilead’ again, which I did.
    “I thought of the Berry/Port William comparison, too. Very similar in many ways beyond the structural”
    ‘Lila’ seems to have some echoes of Berry, whether intentional or not I don’t know.

  11. Anne-Marie

    Re the orthodoxy of Congregationalist ministers: My great-uncle was one, and he was scandalized that my cousin (a nominal Catholic married to a nominal Lutheran) did not have her two daughters baptized at birth. When he found out, he insisted on baptizing them right away.

  12. Interesting. And good for him. The Congregationalist in Gilead does infant baptisms (unless I’m confusing him with his Lutheran friend). Which is surprising to me, as I lazily assumed they were in the Anabaptist tradition.

  13. I think Congregationalists are part of the Reformed (Calvinist) tradition, to the extent they’re part of anything. The emphasis on the congregation as an autonomous unit of church governance leads to lots of variety, though.

  14. I finally took the trouble to look into Fr. John Hardon’s Protestant Churches of America and discovered that the Congregationalists as much as the Episcopalians could be called America’s original church. They were a union of the original Mayflower Pilgrims (separatist Anglicans) and the Massachusetts Bay Puritans (Calvinist Anglicans). They founded many of the New England colleges that are now pillars of secular liberalism: Harvard, Dartmouth, Amherst, Bowdoin. Apparently their most visible current institutional body is the United Church of Christ, which is among the most “liberal” of the mainline denominations and is strongly identified with progressive politics, so much so that the fairly orthodox views of the pastor in this novel are a little surprising.

  15. The novel is set in 1956.

  16. And he is a fan of Feuerbach.

  17. I would have thought that by 1956 theological liberalism was beginning to carry the day in churches like that. But I’m not sure of the significance of Feuerbach. Last I heard of him before this novel was in a religion class 40+ years ago. Liberal or neo-orthodox? Guess I better consult Wikipedia.

  18. Well, ok then…. Now I can’t remember what Ames says about Feuerbach–is it something his infidel-philosopher read, or did Ames himself admire it?

  19. I can’t remember the specifics of the reference to Feuerbach in ‘Gilead,’ but there was a period of time when, at least in Protestant theological circles, he was a writer that pastors and theologians would have felt obliged to engage with.
    It would make sense chronologically if Ames were told by his “mentor” to read Feuerbach, figuring that if Ames was an elderly man in 1956, he would have been of seminary age in the early 1900’s. Not sure if Feuerbach would have still been on the table as a critical thinker at that time, but it’s certainly possible. The wiki article states that ‘The Essence of Christianity’ had its 2nd edition English transl. published in 1881.

  20. Having read through to the end now, the narrator shows an element of Barth-inflected Calvinist reaction to his own father’s turn-of-the-century liberalism.

  21. His brother gave him Feuerbach, and he hid the fact that he was reading it from his parents. Ames liked it very much because of the joy and something else. The atheism didn’t bother him, or have an effect on him. He wanted his son to read him someday.
    AMDG

  22. Btw, I finished Lila a couple days ago. I thought it excellent — not quite as good as Gilead, but better than Home (which is by no means a bad book).
    Thanks for the info, Janet. I’ll have to go back and look at that bit about Feuerbach.

  23. Yes, I’m sorry that I saved Home until last because I’m sure I would have liked it better if I’d read it before the others. I’m in the middle of it now. I’ve been thinking how the order you read them in really changes the overall experience of a book. A person who read Lila first, would read a completely different Gilead that someone who read them in the opposite direction.
    Okay, I’m checking my italics three times.
    AMDG

Leave a reply to Janet Cancel reply