I have this fear that nobody read the book. But just in case any of you did, this is the day that we had set aside to discuss it, so I’ll start.
I chose this book because it’s a favorite of mine and I hadn’t read it in awhile. Often when I reread books, I pick up on flaws or contrivances that I missed in the first reading, but this book is better, for me, each time I read it. First, the manner in which Muriel Spark so effortlessly carries the reader into the future and then into the pasts of the “Brodie set” is quite amazing to me. This is a very difficult thing for a writer to do well. Instead of describing the girls when they were little, then following them through high school and then revealing the way that each turned out as adults, we are able to view the girls with a sort of retrospective knowledge. I also like the way Muriel Spark repeats the facts about each character (Mary died in a hotel fire, Rose was famous for sex) for two reasons. One is a practical one – it helped me remember who was who in this book with many characters and a lot of jumping around. But also, this is the way we often think about people in our lives. If you knew a girl quite well in high school, and later learned that she died, in her 20s, in a hotel fire, you would think about that fire every single time you thought of the girl. It also gave a sort of rhythm to the narrative, almost like a refrain, when referring to each girl.
Though it’s written from an omniscient point of view, the story is really Sandy’s story. We never really see any of the characters unless they are with Sandy but we are constantly reminded that Sandy has a very limited perspective with those tiny little eyes that she’s always squinting through. I loved it when, later in the book, Miss Brodie tells Sandy to have her eyes examined, as it seems that she’s not able to see, the way she peers at people. Sandy responds that it only appears that she can’t see people but she actually sees them quite well. At this point she is already viewing Miss Brodie with a bit of skepticism.
I’m interested in what you all thought. Feel free to weigh in even if you didn’t finish it or hated it. What did you all think about the religious aspects of the story – about Sandy’s conversion to Catholicism, her book “The Transfiguration of the Commonplace” and most importantly, the idea of a woman having a “prime.” I have always loved the character of Jean Brodie, I just love her, and when I love her the most is when she is describing her prime, as if it is a thing. I have had a few Miss Brodies in my life – wonderfully charismatic and lovable narcissists whom I once held in very high regard and then came to see as human, with flaws, like the rest of us.
You had a good solid idea of the book. I wasn’t able to quite pin it down as well as you did. Can’t say as I liked Miss Brody much. I found her a rather sad,pathetic character, the way she manipulated her “set” and almost lived her life through them.
I liked all the girls, their characters were well developed.
The writer’s style was confusing but I like it very much in the way that she didn’t answer any questions and made you think right up to the end – still, no real answers as to the betrayal I don’t know why Sandy gave her up, maybe that’s for each of us to answer.
Overall well written and a good story.
Love the pup, and love the name, great fit. It will be fun to watch her grow thru the blog. As you know I watched the movie with Maggie Smith and I love the way she played Miss Brodie, as such a strong and confident woman. In the movie she was played as a very interesting teacher that marched to her own drum, she seemed like such a breath of fresh air at the school. I liked that she bucked the system with her style of teaching, I think I would have done well in her classroom. She would never be boring, for sure. But I do believe that Miss Brodie considered herself to be one of the young girls she was teaching, and that she was so into being in HER prime. Maybe that was the conflict with herself and Sandy?
I found the book interesting in that Jean Brodie doesn’t seem to have the perspective that Sandy eventually acquires. She has an air about her that keeps her removed from her peers, always holding herself above the rest by repeatedly stating how she is “in her prime” and because of this devine state, she has acguired “insight and instinct,” but yet it is not above her to manipulate the Brodie set to do her bidding, even circumventing moral or religious standards to achieve her way. I found it amazing that she would manpulate Sandy and Rose, both still teens, in order to set Rose up as Teddy Lloyd’s lover, and yet Sandy is the one who eventually becomes his lover. This act to me was the beginning of Sandy’s awareness which led to her betrayal of Jean Brodie. It was interesting that she projected onto the girls the need to have insight, but yet, Jean Brodie had very little, if any, insight into the people and events around her.
Oh thank you Annie, after reading how much Anne loves Miss Brodie, I thought I was the only one who didn’t like her. I won’t discuss everything right now, but I’ll say that I liked Miss Brodie in the very beginning. I loved that she broadened the girls horizons. But then she just went overboard, became so controlling and boorish frankly. I too found her sad and pathetic, and I also suspect she might have been insane towards the end. I think she acted so sure of herself, so know it all, but it really masked an insecure person underneath. I think she needed to control these girls to make herself feel more secure. I especially felt that when she would call Mary stupid. She’s such a wonderful teacher, but she calls one of her ‘set’ stupid? And tries to set up an affair between Rose and Mr Lloyd.
There’s much more I want to discuss, but will limit it to that for now.
Oh, except what does “The Transfiguration of the Commonplace” even mean? I could not figure that out for the life of me.
I honestly feel like I need the Cliff Notes for this book, because I didn’t get it at all.
Oh my, where to begin. While I couldn’t seem to put the book down, and I really liked the storytelling style (the flashes forward and backward, the suspense element of the betrayal, and the repetition technique in the character development), I don’t know whether I liked the book or not. I guess it’s a testament to Muriel Spark that I couldn’t put it down, while not finding any character worth really rooting for. I found them all either vapid or narcissistic. (I’m sure I need to read it again to pick up on more of the nuances.) I also found it disturbing how loyal (and subsequently dis-loyal) the girls were to Miss Brodie. Why would the Brodie Set stick with her long after it was necessary in the school system? On the other hand, since this story takes place in the 30′s, I suppose there weren’t very many role models for girls who wanted to buck the system. In that respect, Miss Brodie was sort of a magnet. She lived life on her own terms. Maybe the girls were willing to put up with her flaws to gain access to her world. (This very thing made the Brodie Set off-putting to me, but this is because I totally remember that pressure in school and my yielding to it and hating myself for being a follower.)
I was surprised at how sexually charged the book was, without really being explicit in any way. Miss Brodie’s manipulations with Rose and Sandy and the men in the book were really disturbing. (This book was written in 1962, so I’m guessing it was pretty cutting edge stuff when it came out. I was born in 1967, so I can see how different perspectives on this story can exist relative to whatever generation is reading it. My grandmother would be horrified, but my mother – who graduated from Berkeley in 1962 – would be far from horrified.)
As for Miss Brodie, I had a mixed reaction to her. I certainly had empathy for her, in that all of her control and manipulations didn’t yield much for her in the end. But I also found her narcissism so irritating I wanted to smack her. So many layers.
The male characters were a pitiful lot, weren’t they. I’m sure I’m missing a whole layer of symbolism where the one-armed music teacher is concerned.
And the irony that Miss Brodie’s downfall was ultimately due to her political beliefs, rather than the legitimate “crime” of manipulating her students, not following the curriculum, and mis-treating her students (the borderline verbal abuse) was interesting.
I could do a whole other post on Sandy, but I don’t want to be a blog hog. I’ll save it for later in the day…
One more thing, regarding a woman having her “prime”. In the 30′s I suspect a woman’s prime was her child bearing years or years of sexual activity. Sad. Now, it seems a woman can choose her prime with her own definition. My mother’s prime was certainly not the period of time where she was raising children. She is the first to admit that her prime hit in her late 50s when she fell into a career. She’s 69 now and runs the place. I used to think my prime was supposed to be college. That was where I’d live life, get a degree and meet my future soulmate. I got a degree.
At 42 I’m just beginning to figure out how to live life. No soulmate in sight. However, I feel like I must be entering my prime, because it is the first time in my life I’ve begun listening to me and doing what I want.
Wow, I can’t seem to shut up. One more thing with respect to the religious aspect. Sandy becoming a nun in the catholic church (with all of it’s guilt) is interesting. Was she really spiritual or did she feel she needed to “pay” for her betrayal? Her book “Transfiguration of the Commonplace” seemed to be code for elevating Miss Brodie (who by her place in society should have been common, ordinary or uninteresting, but wasn’t) to a supernatural level (like Jesus). What do you guys think??
Cath, you bring up some great points. Interesting that you’re not sure you liked it, but you couldn’t put it down. I couldn’t wait for it to be over. If I had been reading it on my own, I wouldn’t have finished it. I actually feel like I’m dissing you Ann, but this is supposed to be a discussion, so I think I have to be honest. Don’t hold back Tracy, tell us what you really feel. lolol
I too didn’t have anyone to root for, and didn’t feel like I ‘knew’ anyone, no matter how many hundreds of times (ok, an eaggeration, but it drove me nuts) their characteristics were repeated. And the way they followed her was almost cult like.
Regarding Sandy becoming a nun, that was totally out of left field for me. But if you remember, while having the affair with Mr Lloyd, she became fascinated with his religion, Catholicism. I don’t see it as penance for the betrayal. My take anyway.
Why did Sandy betray Miss Brodie? Do you think it was realizing how much she had controlled them? Maybe because she had strongly encouraged Emily Joyce to go fight in the war and she was killed?
As for being in your prime, I liked that Miss Brodie considered it a thing, though I think she was past it at some point and didn’t or wouldn’t realize it. I agree with Catherine. My prime is now at 46. I think your prime is when you feel the best about yourself, are most comfortable in your own skin, are able to live life fully. I’m living the life I should have been living for the last 20 years, but was too afraid to, and took life too seriously. It goes back to the ‘I am my own sun’ revelation I had when Ann saw the one variety of sunflowers at Moses’s. Maybe your prime is different for everyone. But to me it’s when you’ve gained wisdom and then the courage to do the things you were afraid to do.
I think you’re right about the transfiguration Catherine. I had to look up the transfiguration of Christ on Wiki, because I spent all my childhood CCD classes thinking about horses, and I learned that the transfiguration took place above a mountain – Jesus appeared with Moses and spoke to God and he had been with several of the apostles when this happened. Afterward, he swore the apostles to secrecy about what had taken place. I believe that in a way, Miss Brodie saw herself as a sort of deity of enlightenment and the girls as her faithful apostles. She had them prop open their books in case Miss McKay wandered in, and then she told them her ideas about love and politics and truth and beauty, etc. It’s easy for me to see how the girls felt very special to be the chosen – the “creme de la creme.” My version of the book (Harper/Perennial) has an essay at the end that explains that Muriel Spark went to a girl’s school in Edinburgh and had a teacher named Miss Kay, who was somewhat like Miss Brodie. She took her favorite girls on outings to the theater and museums and referred to them as the “creme de la creme” and Ms. Spark has written that this teacher is the one who made her become a writer.
It was interesting to me that Miss Brodie loved Mussolini and the Fascisti while at the same time preaching to the girls about being independent thinkers and not having anything to do with “team spirit.” She was so misguided and self-deluded, but she did lift the minds of the girls above the “commonplace.”
I’m not sure what to make of Sandy’s becoming a cloistered nun who clutches the bars like a prisoner when people come to visit.
I really loved the way the girls fantasized about Miss Brodie and her dead lover, Hugh, whom I think we are supposed to come to understand was probably just a person she vaguely knew and not a lover at all.
Yes, it’s true that the few male characters were rather cartoonish, but I think that the book is about a girl’s school and set in a time when there were many spinsters, due to the war and a girl who lived like Sandy would probably not know or understand men very well.
I loved this book. I love the contradictions (I think the literary term is “paradox.” Ann? Lupe?) that are layered (to use Catherine’s term) throughout this book. Granted, they’re not as layered as Joyce’s “Ulysses” (which, thanks to Uncle Sul, I’m ripping out my hair to read). Nonetheless, I find myself reading a section in “Miss Brody” and then doubling back to laugh and then think about the implications of what Miss Brody and her set are doing. Who wouldn’t love a “liberal arts” teacher devoted to fascism? Or a highly sexualized teacher who educates her students to the virtues of purity? Or a treaties written by a deflowered nun on the Transfiguration of the Commonplace?
I’m not sure why Muriel wrote this book, but it can be read as an indictment against all those social systems that work together (school, family, church, and state) to educate a group of individuals. And how that group can rise up and rebel against authority. I’m thinking of Sandy’s rebellion against (or betrayal of) Miss Brody. But I’m also thinking of Miss Brody rebelling against a conservative curriculum (though hers was fairly restrictive as well) and social mores of sex, sex education, and marriage.
Catherine,
You said you have “no soulmate in sight.” I thought Rick Springfield was permanently in your periscope. Did I miss something? Have you torpedoed him?
I loved this book on so many levels, and my thoughts are a swirling jumble right now. What I love most is the author’s economy of words to tell her story, and also the names of her characters. Mostly, Sandy Stranger, who transforms into Sister Helena of the Transfiguration, who writes “her strange book of psychology, ‘The Transfiguration of the Commonplace’….” I think at the end of Miss Brodie’s life, it dawns on her that Sandy was indeed, a stranger to her. I think Jean Brodie transformed the lives of the middle class girls she chose as her set. One could make a point that Miss Brodie was not a good influence, but considering the sociopolitical climate of the 1930s, I think she was a well-drawn character representing new thought.
I could go on and on, but those are a few of my musings this morning. It is still morning here in California. I do agree with Ann about the character, Hugh. I am enjoying hearing everyone’s thoughts about this book. Fun.
Colleen, I love the point you made about Jean Brody rebelling against the conservative curriculum, but you also aptly note that she was conservative in the way she presented her own ideas/topics, not giving a well-rounded presentation of all facts. She thought she was above the administration and other teachers, but yet she failed these girls as well by only giving her view on various topics.
Colleen, though I adore Rick Springfield as an artist (and a cutie with a cute tush), I think his soulmate is his wife of 25+ years Barbara. So I gush from afar…a respectful distance. But let me tell you, I some shocking behavior on my cruise by fans (or skanky stalkers, as I refer to them now.) His wife is a saint!
Here’s a great passage about one of the ways Miss Brodie casts a spell among her girls. It’s on page seven of my book. Ms. Brodie has just shown the very young girls a portrait of the Prime Minister in the headmistress’s office and scoffs at his slogan which is “Safety First,” saying that “Goodness, Truth and Beauty come first.”
Here’s the passage:
“This was the first intimation, to the girls, of an odds between Miss Brodie and the rest of the teaching staff. Indeed, to some of them, it was the first time they had realized it was possible for people glued together in grown-up authority to differ at all. Taking inward note of this, and with the exhilarating feeling of being in on the faint smell of row, without being endangered by it, they followed dangerous Miss Brodie into the secure shade of the elm.”
They followed dangerous Miss Brodie into the secure shade of the elm.
I just realized some of my comments today may be tainted by the fact that I just came out of a two hour sexual harassment training class – ha.
I just read Ann’s comment about how “They followed dangerous Miss Brodie into the secure shade of the elm.” So on some level they chose Miss Brodie, just as she chose them. They used her as she used them. I’ve got to re-read this book now.
In the meantime, here is my take on Sandy.
Okay, so Sandy is a complex character. She commits at least four of the seven deadly sins prior to becoming a nun (Pride/Vanity, Envy, Lust and Anger) and I believe breaks a few of the ten commandments along the way. Perhaps this is why she “clutches the bars of the grille.” I think she was definitely conflicted about her choices in life, but it is interesting that when Monica visits her at the nunnery (?) and says “Before she died…Miss Brodie thought it was you who betrayed her” Sandy’s response is “It’s only possible to betray where loyalty is due.” Contrast this with the last line of the book, after the “young man” asks her what her main influences were in her school days, and she says “There was a Miss Jean Brodie in her prime.” And she is clutching the bars of the grille “more desperately than ever.” Also, I Wiki-ed Saint Helena for fun and guess what? She is the patron saint of new discoveries, famed for her piety. What does it all mean Alfie??
Thanks Wendy. What I also loved about Miss Brody is her drive to impart all of her paradoxical shortcomings into her set of girls (she’s such an endearing flawed characher!). Like the passage Ann just pointed out, she knew how to grab the girls attention and command them to follow her into the “secure shade.”
What I also noticed about her set of girls is, as a composite, they made up her personality. Sandy = perceptive yet lacking vision. Rose = hypersexualized yet almost disinterested in sex. Jenny = actor/performer. And even Mary = ignorant/naive.
I think one of my favorite passages came right after the passage Ann mentions. It begins the second chapter in which we learn Mary MacGregor (the dumb one) was working as a Wren in WWII, witnessing the death and destruction of it, wondering if she had ever been happy in her life. She realizes the first years with Miss Brody, “sitting listening to all those stories and opinions which had nothing to do with the ordinary world, had been the happiest time of her life.”
Colleen, I like what you said about Mary and the self-assessment she does regarding her happiness. When you look at the time when the girls first come to Miss Brodie, she envelopes them in a cocoon, esentially cutting them off from the world around them. She has a captive audience that she can mold-they are so impressionable at that stage-and Miss Brodie takes advantage of this time in their young lives.
The more I read all your comments, the more I love this book. You’ve given me so much more to think about.
I did not get to read the book.
From the comments here, it appears to be a literary feat to describe some of the stuff that went on in those days in some of the schools, perhaps more so in the private ones, the places where well to do girls were sent.
I had a cousin who was sent to one of those schools while a teen, as her step mom could not stand her and her biological father was not strong enough to say otherwise. In her case… she came out strange and attracted to women only. Took her some ten years to ‘discover’ herself. In my opinion, there is way too much power, if you are good at teaching, and you have all of those young minds focused on you, due to need or design (school systems at the time).
I am more familiar with other writings of other women from that era and it appears as if that much control causes same sort of damage. We are fortunate that we did not grow up during those times, that is all I have to say. Public schools may not be perfect, but there is a wide opportunity for young ones to see what is around them, without being forced to focus on the ‘one’ male or female. I did not read the book and I am unsure of I am making any sense!.
I rememberthe one teacher I had when I was young, and at the time what she said was the Gospel….huge influence. Then I got ‘mouthy’ and all (the teachings) went to hell.
Ann:
Las caracolas de Neruda…
http://www.elpais.com/articulo/cultura/caracolas/Neruda/exhiben/Instituto/Cervantes/elpepucul/20091201elpepucul_14/Tes
This is from Neruda’s shell collection. Apparently he had some 400 of them. Since you appreciate his poetry, I thought I would send you the link, even though it is NOT related to your postings..
Gosh! I logged on with ideas of what I wanted to say & now, after reading everyone’s comments, I’m confused!
)) I liked Miss Brodie in the beginning & thought she was a wonderful teacher, exposing her girls to real life situations, places and people. As the novel progressed, I began to think less of Miss Brodie, primarily because I felt she was not honest and she was extremely manipulative. “Goodness, Truth and Beauty come first” is what she taught
but not what she practiced. She denounces “team spirit”, “always employed to cut across individualism,love and personal loyalties” but she admires Mussolini and, even more, Hitler? She encourages Rose to have an affair with Teddy. She has an affair with Gordon (or does she?), fattens him up & he marries Miss Lockhart. Sandy, with her pig eyes, really did see everything. Sandy replies to Miss Brodie about who betrayed her “If you did not betray us, it is impossible that you would have been betrayed by us.” In what ways did Miss Brodie betray her girls? And didn’t Miss Brodie suffer on a gibbet of her own devising, just as did her ancestor, Willie Brodie? I thought The Transfiguration of The Commonplace was inspired by Miss Brodie’s life in which she sought to transfigure the commonplace. Oh, and I definitely believe in one’s prime! A thought-provoking book.
I am very curious to get a male’s opinion of this book. Any takers? Alan? John?
I loved this book and have many thoughts about it. Where to begin? I liked the “retrospective” aspect of telling the story. It helped me to remember each girl and to flesh out the characters. I loved Jean Brodie, at least initially. She was a complex character – a feminist who was way ahead of her time. I also loved the way she constantly spoke of her “prime” and how she seemed to be defined by it. She was extremely narcissistic and self-righteous, but I found many of her comments and criticisms of others amusing. Where she crossed the line for me was her verbal abuse of some of the girls. The fact that she was an ardent admirer of Mussolini and the “fascisti” while at the same time instructed her “set” to be independent thinkers and not followers was contradictory. I was rooting for Miss Brodie until she began to manipulate Rose and Sandy with the men. In the end, I felt sympathy for the sad, pathetic character she had become.
I’m not sure I understand why Sandy betrayed Miss Brodie, nor why Sandy became a nun. Was it out of guilt for her betrayal of Miss Brodie? I’m also curious about the significance of Sandy holding on to the bars when visitors came to see her. And, Sandy’s “tiny little eyes.”
I agree that the male characters were a pitiful lot.
It’s interesting that Muriel Spark modeled Miss Brodie after one of her own teachers. I would love to have had a teacher like Jean Brodie when I was young and impressionable.
Ann – thanks for choosing this book. It was a great read. I’m looking forward to renting the movie. I’m sure Maggie Smith is fantastic as Miss Brodie.
Linda S.
I started out liking the book, but then had a hard time with it. I also felt Miss Brody was quite a sad and manipulative person. I liked the characters, but still found it a “hard” read. I too can use the Cliff Notes on this one. I am glad you exposed me to this style of writing and it was a challenge for me to get through and understand this book. I so wanted to stop reading it, but it somehow kept my interest enough to complete. I also wanted to share and understand everyone’s take on the book. I will may have to attempt a second read to really understand it. The Library in my town, had such a old copy, it was fun to have one of the original copies.
I’m starting to feel very paranoid. Am I really the only person who didn’t like the book? Really? I feel like there’s something wrong with me. I’m not kidding, I’m feeling inadequate because I just didn’t get it, didn’t find it illuminating. I was excited to read it, so it’s not like I went into it with a negative mindset.
Oh, no! I got the book but thought book group was on 12/3. I’m not going to read these reviews until I finish it myself. I too got a new puppy (on 11/22) and am in and out about 100 times a day!
No Tracy, I’m sure there are others who didn’t like it and aren’t being as vocal. I’m sure if you go to the Amazon page for the book you’ll find many others who didn’t like it. I really dislike many books that others love, it’s all a matter of personal taste.
I’m kind of late to the table for today’s discussion (where DO you all find the time during the day to comment on this blog?), so there’s not much to add to the many interesting and thoughtful observations that have already been offered up about our initial reading assignment.
Though this type of novel is not typically my cuppa tea, on balance I generally enjoyed the book, though – truth be told – by the end I simply couldn’t muster up much empathy or compassion for many (most? all?) of the story’s various characters. I finished reading the book, said to myself “well, that was interesting”, and moved on to other things. No lingering reflections, no wistful sighs, no internal debates about the book’s deeper meanings, no re-reading of memorable passages.
One thing that did strike me that I don’t believe has been mentioned yet is the seeming simplicity of language and style with which Muriel Spark told a fairly complex story. I also liked (as Ann pointed out) the author’s shifting of time backwards and forwards to slowly unwrap the plot details and her repetition of facts about each character to help the reader distinguish one from the another.
Perhaps what I enjoyed most about this ‘assignment’ was reading a book that would not normally be in my field of vision and then reading what all of you had to say about it. I’m already looking forward to the next book.
And, Tracy, take a deep breath and relax! It’s just a book…some people liked it alot; others, not so much; and still others, not at all. No biggie.
Any suggestions for the next book? I have a few in mind and promise the next one won’t be so girly. Also, I’m planning in the future to do a book by an author who will maybe do a scheduled chat with us after we read the book.
I guess the needing to fit part of me is cropping up. I’ve really been thinking about it, and I think I need at least one character that I love and root for, and this book didn’t have it for me. So that may be a big reason for my dissatisfaction. I’ll stop complaining about it now and just read what others have to say.
As for another book, I really loved A Tree Grows in Brooklyn when I read it a month or so ago. It’s beautifully written, and the character Francie is someone you really fall in love with. It’s a long book, so we’d need more time to read it, especially with the holidays. I can’t think of anything else right now.
I just read The Help by Kathryn Stockett. This is an amazing book that you won’t be able to put down. It even sucked my husband in.
Another favorite is The Book Thief by Markus Zusak.
I’ve been cataloging the books that I have read, and plan to read at Goodreads.com. Here is the link to my page if anyone is interested in recommendations: http://www.goodreads.com/review/list/146425-michele?shelf=read
Tracy, I appreciate your contributions to this discussion. In fact, I have enjoyed everyone’s thoughtful comments about this book, and only wish that we could have met in person. Thanks, Ann, for coming up with this idea, and I look forward to the next book.
Dear Ms. Leary,
Please excuse Rose from not completing the reading assignment. The dog ate her book.
Sincerely,
Rose’s Mother
I just went on twitter…couldn’t resist, are Mark and Snoopy included in your new venture with the dogs?
On a more serious note..I did read the book, but I wasn’t thrilled with Miss Brodie either, and I did find it a bit hard to follow. I had to read it in H.S. and wasn’t a big fan of it then. Maybe if I had the time to sit and read for more than an hour or so at a time I may have gotten more out of it.
Late to the party as usual, but I read this book and wanted to give a few comments. Tracy, you’re not alone – this book dragged for me, and I agree the lack of a sympathetic main character is the most likely reason. Ann, it may be a great feat as a writer to tell a story through the back and forth time thing, but as an avid reader – there still needs to be a compelling story told or one loses interest. This book lost my interest about half way through. The comments on the blog have re-energized me (like a good book club discussion tends to do!) I have to agree with Alan, the best part about participating in this exercise is being pulled out of my usual sphere of reading materials and then understanding the book better through everyone’s comments. Thanks to all! Ann, I’m looking forward to the next selection!!
Tracy, think about this…sometimes I think, “enjoyed the book” doesn’t necessarily mean you gain a fondness for the characters. If you really felt a discomforting dislike of the characters, then the author was very successful at portraying their lives. This book left me feeling sad at the end, but like Alan, it was easy to move on. So anyway, my take on the title? What it all boils down to, aren’t the girls actually “The prime of Miss Jean Brodie”?
Ann, thank you so much for coming up with this idea. I am a huge reader, and like Alan, was glad to move out of my comfort zone, and read something I wouldn’t have on my own (also like him, I read it, then moved on). I agree with Mindi about the lack of interest in the charachters. And Dearest Tracy, I did not like the book as a whole. I ran out immediatly upon Ann’s annoucement, but then when I started it I kept thinking, “really? She loves this? What am I missing?” It didn’t grab me, no one was anyone I cared about (although I did like Miss Brodie more than any of the girls). The repetition of charachteristics, was, to me anyway, just annoying. Sorry Ann, not my favorite. But, but… I am really glad that I can now say I have read it. (Seriously, I’ll read anything that is suggested by someone I admire, and you are at the top of that list.)
Tracy, I couldn’t hook into any of the characters in Miss Brodie either. I really wanted to like at least one of them but I didn’t.
I read lots of books & one of the best ones I’ve read lately is The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society by Mary Ann Shaffer.
Michelle, I’ve sent you a friend request on goodreads.com. I just love that site. Ann, you might like it, plus it’s a good place for authors to promote their books.
Ann, I just saw the book on your nightstand (“Await Your Reply” by Dan Chaon) and your choice for the next AL book club choice. It’s a great read. I read it in September. You probably already know this, but Dan Chaon did a guest blog post from August 17 – 21, 2009, on Well-Read Donkey (http://wellreaddonkey.blogspot.com/). It’s the Kelper’s Writing Group blog.
I’ve really enjoyed the exchange on Miss Jean Brodie, dissent and all. Always a healthy learning experience on this blog. Looking forward to the next discussion.
Ann, I have a suggestion for the next book, it’s entitled, Outtakes from a Marriage. It’s by an author who lives in Connecticut, her first novel,after writing a memoir, and it’s quite good. She’s married to an actor/writer or something like that.
I’m pretty sure we could even get her for a chat sometime to discuss the book too.
: )
Colleen, no, I didn’t know he did the guest blog and it’s gone now. I recall reading a great review of this book and haven’t had a chance to read it yet. Glad you liked it!
I agree with Julie and how as I started reading it, I was like hmm, really? It was hard for me to get through only because I didn’t care for any of the characters. I didn’t want to know more about them…But I am glad I read it and going through everyone’s comments does make the book more fulfilling for me. So, I can’t wait for the next one!
Thanks Ann!
Ann, his blog post is still there. It’s in the August archives. If you go to Well-Read Donkey (http://wellreaddonkey.blogspot.com/), look to the left side of the screen and then scroll down. The archive links are close to the bottom of the page.
I agree with you Alan, as I enjoyed the opportunity to read a book that would probably never be on the radar for me. It took me a while to get into this book, but enjoyed reading it overall. This wasn’t a book that “gripped” me from the beginning, but I kept at it and I’m glad I finished. That is the great thing about a book club-having the assignment of reading the book keeps me moving forward!
Rose, love it, thanks for a good laugh.
I feel better now that others have shared that they didn’t like it. Whew! Julie, I did the same thing as I was reading it. ‘Ann loves this book? Why?’ ‘It’s known for it’s great character development? How, when I still don’t know any of them?’
Annie, very funny.
Ok, I’ll see what the next book is about. Looking forward to a new read.
I’ve been thinking about what people are saying about the characters not being developed, and I guess I see it differently. I see the sets’ develop from pre-teens through adolescents and into adulthood. Granted, we don’t see this development in a linear fashion, so maybe they don’t look developed. But I think that’s what I also like about the book. Muriel Spark gives you the opportunity to piece it together. She’s doesn’t say Sandy, as a young, impressionable, nearsighted ten year old falls in love with her teacher only to betray that love in her adolescence when she begins to resent Miss Brodie and all of her flaws, only to betray her as an adult. Or something like that (obviously I’m not a writer). Instead, Muriel sprinkles in the information and lets you decide why Sandy betrayed Miss Brodie.
I think Annie was wondering about this betrayal. I like the fact that Muriel didn’t come out and say (once again please forgive the crude writing), Sandy betrayed Miss Brodie because she grew to resent her. Muriel gives you the space to give it any read or reason you want. You can decide it was a love/hate relationship gone bad. Or, you can give it an Oedipal/Electra read, in which case Sandy rejects Miss Brodie, her mother figure. Anyway, I thought the characters were developed, as peculiarly flawed as they were.
Just FYI, the movie is phenomenal. If you haven’t seen it, then you’re in for a real treat!