Book Group: Demons Part One

I would like to apologize for missing my first deadline of April 20. I will try to be better in the future. Without further ado, here is the first of what I hope will be many great discussions about books.

We are reading Demons in three parts according to the following schedule:

Part I - April 20
Part II - May 11
Part III - June 1

In this post I will discuss Part I, pages 1-206 in the Vintage Classics paperback edition, through a series of passages and questions.

Similar to Brothers Karamazov, Dostoevsky starts this novel with a verse from the Bible. In Demons it is Luke 8:32-36, which reads as follows:

Now a large herd of swine was feeding there on the hillside; and they
begged him to let them enter these. So he gave them leave. Then
the demons came out of the man and entered the swine, and the herd rushed down
the steep bank into the lake and were drowned.

When the herdsman saw what had happened, they fled, and told it in the city
and in the country. Then people went out to see what had happened, and they
came to Jesus, and found the man from whom the demons had gone, sitting at
the feet of Jesus, clothed and in his right mind; and they were afraid. And
those who had seen it told them how he who had been possessed with demons was
healed.

Why do you think Dostoevsky chose this verse? Did you notice anything in Part I that added meaning to the verse?

I found some clues in this passage on pages 25-26:

you cannot imagine what sorrow and anger seize one's whole soul when a
great idea, which one has long and piously revered, is picked up by some
bunglers and dragged into the street, to more fools like themselves, and one
suddenly meets it in the flea market unrecognizable, dirty, askew, absurdly
presented, without proportion, without harmony, a toy for stupid
children!

I believe the above passage describes the course this novel will take--certain great ideas, "long and piously revered" will be "picked up by some bunglers and dragged into the street," only to be disclosed as "unrecognizable, dirty, askew, absurdly presented, without proportion, without harmony, a toy for stupid children."

As I mentioned in my original post, Demons is about ideas run amok. Part I is essentially an extended introduction to the main characters and their Demons. As I read Part I, I had a hard time "rooting" for one character as a protagonist. They all appear quite devious.

Did you identify with any one character? If so, why?

On a "day of surprisingly converging accidents," Part I culminates on page 203 with Shatov striking Nikolai Vsevolodovich:

Shatov, who had been completely forgotten by all in his corner(not far from
Lizaveta Nikolaevna), and who apparently did not know himself why he was sitting
there and would not go away, suddenly rose from his chair and walked across the
entire room, with unhurried but firm steps, towards Nikolai Vsevolodovich,
looking him straight in the face. The latter noticed him approaching from
afar and grinned slightly: but when Shatov came up close to him, he ceased
grinning.

When Shatov stopped silently in front of him, without taking his eyes off
him, everyone suddenly noticed it and became hushed, Pyotr Stepanovich last of
all; Liza and her maman stopped in the middle of the room. Thus about five
seconds went by; the expression of bold perplexity on Nikolai Vsevolodovich's
face turned to wrath, he frowned, and suddenly . . .

And suddenly Shatov swung his long, heavy arm and hit him in the face with
all his might. Nikolai Vsevolodovich swayed badly on his feet.

Shatov hit him even somehow peculiarly, not at all as people ordinarily slap
someone in the face (if it is possible to put it so), not with his palm, but
with his whole fist, and his was a big, heavy, bony fist, covered with red hair
and freckles. if he had hit the nose, he would have broken it. But the blow
landed on the cheek, touching the left corner of the lip and the upper teeth,
which immediately started to bleed.

Then the narrator proceeds to describe Nicolai Vsevolodovich's character and his response as follows:

Nicolai Vsevolodovich was one of those natures that knows no fear. In a duel
he would stand cold-bloodedly before his adversary's fir, take aim himself, and
kill with brutal calm. If anyone had slapped him in the face then, I think he
would not even have challenged the offender to a duel, but would have killed him
at once, on the spot; he was precisely that sort, and would kill with full
awareness and not at all in rage. I even think that he never knew those blinding
fits of wrath that make one unable to reason. For all the boundless anger that
would occasionally take possession of him, he was always able to preserve
complete self-control, and therefore to realize that for killing someone
otherwise than in a duel he would certainly be sent to hard labor; nevertheless,
he would still have killed the offender, and that without the slightest
hesitation.

. . .

And yet, in the present case, something different and wondrous occurred.

As soon as he straightened up, after having swayed so disgracefully to one
side, almost as much as half his height, from the slap he had received, and
before the mean, somehow as if wet, sound of a fist hitting a face seemed to
have faded away in the room, he immediately seized Shatov by the shoulders with
both hands; but immediately, at almost the same moment, he jerked both hands
back and clasped them behind him. He said nothing, looked at Shatov, and turned
pale as a shirt. But strangely, his eyes seemed to be dying out. Ten seconds
later his look was cold and--I'm convinced I'm not lying--calm. Only he
was terribly pale. Of course, I do not know what was inside the man, I
only saw the outside. It seems to me that if there were such a man, for
example, as would seize a red-hot bar of iron and clutch it in his hand, with
the purpose of measuring his strength of mind, and in the course of ten seconds
would be overcoming the intolerable pain and would finally overcome it, this
man, it seems to me, would endure something like what was experienced now, in
these ten seconds, by Nikolai Vsevolodovich.

Shatov leaves the room "softly, his shoulders hunched up somehow especially awkwardly, his head bowed, and as if he were reasoning something out with himself."

Why do you think Shatov challenged Nikolai Vsevolodovich? Why do you think Nikolai Vsevolodovich resisted his natural response to kill Shatov "at once, on the spot"? What do you think Shatov was thinking as he exited the room?

I'm anxious to hear your thoughts generally and your response to the above questions. I will initiate another post on May 11, when we will discuss Part II.

Book Group: Helps for Understanding Demons

For those of you working to complete the first part of Demons before Friday, here are a few helps sent by Chantalle:

http://community.middlebury.edu/~beyer/courses/previous/ru351/novels/devils/devil.shtml

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Possessed_(novel)

http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/jim_forest/pevear.htm

Please be warned that the above links contain information that may spoil the plot.

Dostoevsky isn't easy to understand, partly because of the number and complexity of his characters. I have posted a list of characters below. I suggest printing it and using it as a bookmark.

I look forward to discussing Part 1 Friday.

A List of Characters from "Demons" by Fyodor Dostoevsky

Russian names are composed of first name, patronymic (from the father’s first name), and family name. Formal address requires the use of first name and patronymic; diminutives are commonly used among family and intimate friends; a shortened form of the patronymic (e.g. Yegorych instead of Yegorovich), used only in speech, also suggests a certain familiarity. Among the aristocracy, who spoke French at least as readily as Russian, the French forms of names were frequently used, such as Julie in place of Yulia.

• Alexei Yegorovich, or Yegorych (no family name)
• Drozdov, Mavriky Nikolaevich (Maurice) – a visiting gentleman and guest of Varvara Petrovna Stavrogin.
• Drozdov, Praskovya Ivanovna (Drozdikha)
• Erkel (no first name or patronymic)
• Fyodor Fyodorovich, called “Fedka the Convict” (no family name) – a roaming criminal suspected of several thefts and murders in the novel.
• Gaganov, Artemy Pavlovich
• Gaganov, Pavel Pavlovich
• G_____v, Anton Lavrentievich
• Karmazinov, Semyon Yegorovich
• Kirillov, Alexei Nilych – a Russian engineer who has been driven insane by the thoughts of God and life after death.
• Lebyadkin, Ignat, called “Captain Lebyadkin” (patronymic “Timofeevich never used) – the drunken former officer whose sister is secretly married to Nicolas.
• Lebyadkin, Marya Timofeevna, or Timofevna – Captain Lebyadkin's sister, rumored to have some connection to Nikolai Stavrogin's past.
• Liputin, Sergei Yegorovich (or Vasilyich)
• Lyamshin (no patronymic or family name)
• Semyon Yakovlevich (no family name)
• Shatov, Darya Pavlovna (Dasha)
• Shatov, Ivan Pavlovich (Shatushka) – a son of former serf to the Stavrogin, former university student and another intellectual who has turned his back on his leftist ideas. This change of heart is what attractes Pyotr Stepanovich Verkhovensky to plot Shatov's murder.
• Verkhovensky, Marya Ignatievna (Marie)
• Shigalyov (no first name or patronymic)
• Stavrogin, Nikolai Vsevolodovich (Nicolas) – the main character of the novel, and a complex figure, he has several inhuman traits about him that resemble a vampire in literature.
• Stavrogin, Varvara Petrovna – Nicolas’s mother, a rich lady who plays at being leftist.
• Tikhon – a bishop who, in Dostoevsky's original drafts, Stavrogin visited for guidance, and revealed some of the disturbing events of his past. Their interview has little effect on Stavrogin, but provides the reader a better understanding of his background. This chapter was not accepted by the censors and Dostoevsky excised it from the original version, in which Bishop Tikhon is not mentioned. The Pevear and Volokhonsky translation includes this chapter, called "At Tikhon's" in an appendix.
• Tolkachenko (no first name or patronymic)
• Tushin, Lizaveta Nikolaevna (Liza, Lise)
• Ulitin, Sofya Marveevna
• Verkhovensky, Pyotor Stepanovich (Petrusha, Pierre) – the son of Stepan and the cause of much of the destruction. He plays at being a true believer revolutionary though his only goal is to have power.
• Verkhovensky, Stepan Trofimovich – the philosopher and intellectual that is partly to blame for the revolutionary ideas that fuel the destruction that occurs in the book. He served as a father figure to Nicolas when Stavrogin was a child.
• Virginsky (no first name or patronymic)
• Virginsky, Arina Prokhorovna
• von Blum, Andrei Antonovich
• von Lembke, Andrei Antonovich (also called “Lembka”)
• von Lembke, Yulia Mikhailovna (Julie)

Book Review: By the Hand of Mormon: The American Scripture that Launched a New World Religion by Terryl L. Givens

Grade: A

"Though argument does not create conviction, lack of it destroys belief. What seems to be proved may not be embraced; but what no one shows the ability to defend is quickly abandoned. Rational argument does not create belief, but it maintains a climate in which belief may flourish." -Austin Ferrer

In By the Hand of Mormon, Terryl Givens examines why the Book of Mormon "has been taken seriously--for very different reasons--by generations of devoted believers and confirmed skeptics." Although his aim is not apologetics, by examining what the Book of Mormon "has meant, and might conceivably yet come to mean, to its various readerships," Givens maintains a climate in which belief may flourish. His work is a masterpiece.

I read By the Hand of Mormon as part of a book group formed by my good friend James Olsen. I recommend this book and James Olsen's book group without reservation. I'm thankful to the book group for renewing my belief that things are better understood when discussed with others. I'm thankful for Terryl Givens for strengthening my testimony of the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon through his careful, well-researched analysis.

This is an informative book. If your knowledge of the Book of Mormon is like mine--largely obtained by reading the Book itself and through a lifetime of Sunday school lessons, conference talks and discussion with members and non-members alike--then you will learn something by reading this book. Additionally, By the Hand of Mormon will increase your confidence that the Book is true. Given's careful examination of the facts reinforced my testimony and enhanced my ability to address my beliefs in academic terms.

Here is the description from the front flap: In By the Hand of Mormon "Givens examines the Book of Mormon's role as a divine testament of the Last Days and as a sacred sign of Joseph Smith's status as a modern-day prophet. He assesses its claim to be a history of the pre-Columbian peopling of the Western Hemisphere. . . . Givens explores how the Book of Mormon has been defined as a cultural product, the imaginative ravings of a rustic religion-maker more inspired by the winds of culture than the breath of God. He also investigates its status as a new American Bible . . . probes the Book's shifting relationship to Mormon doctrine and its changing reputation among theologians and scholars. Finally . . . Givens highlights the Book's role as the engine behind what may become the next world religion."

Here are a few nice excerpts on analyzing the Book of Mormon's theological merit: "Bruce R. McConkie gave canonical utterance to the logic of LDS testimony that continues to be a feature of member and missionary expression alike: "The Book of Mormon . . . stands as a witness to all the world that Joseph Smith was the Lord's anointed through whom the foundation was laid for the great latter-day work of restoration."

"As a result . . . the Book of Mormon was seldom presented --or received by the appreciative--in terms of its claims, arguments, or doctrine. Its a priori incarnation as sacred history inscribed in gold, together with the aura of supernatural origins always framed its mention, far overshadowed and even displaced whatever internal persuasiveness it might have had. And just as Joseph’s prophetic authority was guarantor of the text's sacred status, so the very presence of this voice speaking "out of the dust," predicted by scripture and verified by the voice of angels and human witnesses alike, was guarantor that Joseph was indeed a prophet of God."

Its status as authoritative text "polarizes the Book of Mormon's reception around the issue of authenticity rather than theological merit."

Givens borrows a framework for understanding this phenomenon from Russian critic Mikhail Bakhtin, who "argues that there are two modes of language by which we are influenced: authoritative discourse and internally persuasive discourse. The latter category is any language that makes its claim upon us on the basis of its logic, rhetorical appeal, compelling argument, or emotional sway. 'The authoritative word,' on the other hand, 'demands that we acknowledge it, that we make it our own; it binds us, quite independent of any power it might have to persuade us internally; we encounter it with its authority already fused to it.' Some language, in other words, is so wedded to an authoritative source that we find it difficult or impossible to assess the content as content. We cannot analyze, negotiate, critique, or selectively assimilate it."

Here's to Spring!

Podcast: New York Times Book Review

For those who enjoy listening to podcasts, the NY Times has started a Book Review Podcast. Here's the link:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/08/books/books-podcast-archive.html?ex=1333598400&en=f7886f115f398db8&ei=5124&partner=permalink&exprod=permalink

Katie Davis Wins Tournament Pick 'em, Dances Like Joakim Noah!

Congratulations to Katie Davis! She dazzled us with her basketball acumen by winning this year's Blakesleague NCAA Tournament Pick 'em. Not only did she beat the men, proving that time watching basketball does not an expert make, but reliable sources tell me that she celebrated her victory by dancing like Joakim Noah:

Katie & Lucas Pictured on Cover of Politico!

Lucas and Katie appeared on the front cover of today's Politico. Here is a photo, followed by links to the cover image and article on campaign fund raising:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0407/3406.html

http://www.politico.com/pdf/frontapril3.pdf

Book Group: Demons by Fyodor Dostoevsky

With all my talk about books, I thought it would be nice if we all read the same book at the same time, followed by an online discussion. With that in mind, I invite you to join me as I read the following books over the next several months, at the rate of one book every one to two months (depending on the size of the book), and according to the loose schedule indicated below:

1. Demons by Fyodor Dostoevsky (April-May)
2. Absurdistan: A Novel by Gary Shteyngart (June)
3. Brigham Young: American Moses by Leonard Arrington (July)
4. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows by J.K. Rowling (August)
5. The Year of Magical Thinking by Joan Didion; and A Grief Observed by C.S. Lewis (September)
6. Alexander Hamilton by Ron Chernow (October)
6. The Omnivore's Dilemma: A Natural History of Four Meals by Michael Pollan (November)
7. READER'S CHOICE (December)

For those that decide to join me in reading the above-listed books, please recommend a favorite book, or something on your reading list, for the month of December. It would be fun to read something that I didn't pick.

Now, rather than burden you with administrative details or with a pathetic plea to read along and participate in what is sure to be a delightful discussion of each book, let me introduce our first book--Demons by Fyodor Dostoevsky.

Demons by Fyodor Dostoevsky

Inspired by the true story of a political murder that horrified Russians in 1869, Fyodor Dostoevsky conceived of Demons as a "novel-pamphlet" in which he would say everything about the plague of materialist ideology that he saw infecting his native land. What emerged was a prophetic and ferociously funny masterpiece of ideology and murder in pre-revolutionary Russia.

From the forward
Demons is a novel of ideas run amok.

"Here, in what many consider the darkest of his novels, Dostoevsky inscribes the fundamental freedom of Judeo-Christian revelation--the freedom to turn from evil, the freedom to repent."

"The demons, then, are ideas, that legion of isms that came to Russia from the West; idealism, rationalism, empiricism, materialism, utilitarianism, positivism, socialism, anarchism, nihilism, and, underlying them all, atheism."

"The world reflected in the novel is already in a state of parody. . . . The issues, the passions, the oppositions, the polemics, the conspiracies are serious, all too serious. It may be said that this world is in a very serious state of parody (demons always want to be taken seriously)."

Translation
Several individuals have translated this book into English. Some call it "The Possessed"; others call it "Devils"; and still others call it "Demons." After reading various translations of Dostoevsky's other novels, I recommend reading the new translation by Richard Pevear and larissa Volokhonsky. Here are links to buy a copy from Amazon.com: paperback / hardcover.

Reading schedule
Demons is a large book, consisting of three parts. I will be reading each part according to the following schedule:

Part I - April 20
Part II - May 11
Part III - June 1

I will initiate discussion for each part on or after the date listed above.

Dostoevsky
Here are two links with more information on Dostoevsky, the man and his writing:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fyodor_Dostoevsky

http://www.eckerd.edu/academics/qfm/qfm%20files/Foltz%20-%20Dostoevsky%20Study%20Guide.pdf

Happy reading!!

Book Review: The Looming Tower:Al-Qaeda and the Road to 9/11 by Lawrence Wright

Grade: A

The New York Times named The Looming Tower one of the ten best books of 2006. I agree. This is a wonderful book that I wholeheartedly recommend to anyone wishing to understand the making of Al-Qaeda and the events leading to September 11, 2001. But don't expect this book to recount the tale told through the news. Instead, Wright explains the philosophical origins of Al-Qaeda, the history of Bin Laden's wealth and influence, including the construction empire built by his illiterate father, the relationship between the United States and Saudi Arabia, the formation of Al Qaeda, and the rise of the Taliban in Afghanistan. Wright ends the book in climactic fashion by telling the story of FBI agent John O'Neill, a brash, driven agent dedicated to ending Al Qaeda and capturing Bin Laden. Ultimately, O'Neill retires from the FBI in July 2001 due to inter-agency politics and problems resulting from his turbulent personal life. In the great irony of the book, O'Neill retires to become Chief of Security at the World Trade Center, where he dies on September 11, 2001, killed by the group he worked so hard to destroy. Its worth reading this book for O'Neill's story alone.

Rather than recount more details, I end with a humorous account about the Taliban's actions shortly after taking Kabul:

The fashion dictators demanded that a man's beard be longer than the grip of his hand. Violators went to jail until they were sufficiently bushy. A man with "Beatle-ly" hair would have his head shaved. Should a woman leave her home without her veil, "her home will be marked and her husband punished," the Taliban penal code decreed. The animals in the zoo--those that had not been stolen in previous administrations--were slain or left to starve. One zealous, perhaps mad, Taliban jumped into a bear's cage and cut off his nose, reputedly because the animal's "beard" was not long enough. Another fighter, intoxicated by events and his own power, leaped into the lion's den and cried out, "I am the lion now!" The lion killed him. Another Taliban soldier threw a grenade into the den, blinding the animal. These two, the noseless bear and the blind lion, together with two wolves, were the only animals that survived the Taliban rule.

"'Throw reason to the dogs,' read a sign posted on the wall of the office of the religious police, who were trained by the Saudis. 'It stinks of corruption.' And yet the Afghan people, so exhausted by war, initially embraced the imposition of this costly order.'"

Top ten reasons why I shouldn't have picked BYU over Xavier:

10. They can't rebound!
9. They can't defend!
8. Austin Ainge shoots too much.
7. Rose shoots too little.
6. Plaisted can't make free throws.
5. Plaisted jumps on every pump fake.
4. Did I mention that they can't rebound?
3. Or defend?
2. Or that Austin Ainge shoots too much?
1. He's no Danny: Austin Ainge, after watching repeated highlights of BYU's 1982 win against Notre Dame, does his best daddy impersonation. Only Austin's version, unlike his father's baseline-to-baseline drive to win the game, ends with Austin driving into traffic, refusing to pass, falling to the ground, losing the ball, and watching time expire.

But, hey, they are far better than Utah. I'm pretty sure I could make Utah's team.

March Madness

Ok, here's a link to the best article on the tournament to date:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/blog/index?entryDate=20070312&name=simmons&lpos=spotlight&lid=tab4pos2

Here are the highlights (with my comments in parentheses):

1) Jeff Green is dynamite!! (Agreed)

2) Rick Majerus: Funniest random moment: The "ESPN GameDay" producers deciding it would be a good idea to have Karl Ravech and Rick Majerus step away from the desk so Majerus could describe how he'd defend Alando Tucker (played by Ravech) ... and Majerus running out of breath in about two seconds. Even Hugo Hurley is in better shape than Rick Majerus. (So sad I missed it!! Hope its on YouTube!! Wish Rick was still coaching the Utes!! Still hate Gordon Monson for running him out of town, among other things!!)

3) Kevin Durant (Yes, he is that good!!)

4) Cable/Satellite technicians (I just switched from Dish Network to Direct TV. Don't get me wrong, I love Direct TV, which has far more sports channels than Dish Network (it isn't even close), but the installation guy was clueless and didn't speak english. At least now I know how to say tripod in Spanish!! I love the Seinfeld episode where Kramer tells the cable guy to come between 8:00 and noon, and then pretends he isn't at home just to get back at them. I've been so tempted to do that!)

Blakesley Bracket Busters

The NCAA Tournament has arrived, which means its time to toe the line and choose your winners. No matter your criteria for picking winners--record, skill, favorite players, alma mater, ticket holder, hatred, jersey color, or if you dated someone with that name (ala the year Amber's roommate won by choosing Kent State because she dated a guy named Kent)--You are hereby invited to join the Blakesleague Tournament Pick'em. In order to join the group, click on this link. When prompted, enter the following information:

Group ID#: 91385
Password: hoyas

Then let it be known which Cardinal you prefer? Louisville or Stanford? Which Wildcat, Kentucky or Villanova? And know that Katie will be selecting Villanova's brand of Wildcat based solely on the looks of their coach, Jay Wright, whom I have been informed is the standard to which all men should aspire. Yes, Jay Wright is the new Matthew McConaughey. Don't believe me? Check out this photo:

You must make your picks before tipoff Thursday afternoon. Good Luck!!

Go Hoyas!!

Happy Birthday to Ian and Musing Ian

I'd like to offer best wishes and a happy birthday to my cousin, friend, and fellow attorney Ian Davis. Today is also, coincidentally, the first birthday of his blog, Musing Ian. Happy Birthday!!

Meet Flip Romney

Readers have requested a photo of Flip Romney, the Dolphin from Massachusetts. Here he is in all his glory!

Baby Lucas meets the (Future?) President

With my mother-in-law visiting from California, Katie and I decided to give her a true Washington experience--we went to hear Mitt Romney speak. This was my first involvement in anything political, and while it was interesting to observe the ultra-political do their thing, and fun to support Romney, the highlight was seeing Lucas meet a Presidential hopeful. Here is video to prove it:



You can see Katie holding Lucas on the left, then Romney bends down to greet him. I am in the back row holding up a sign to block "Flip" the anti-Romney Dolphin from the camera's view. Near the end of the clip you can see Katie and Lucas trailing Romney into the hotel.

Amber for Best Supporting Actress

I vote Amber for best supporting actress. If Al Gore can win for a PowerPoint, this fine video is certainly worthy of an Oscar. Amber is the second girl on the couch, the one who hides behind a magazine. Amber: Who is ZANTAR, and what does ZANTAR mean?

Photos of El Nino (that's Spanish for "The Nino")

A certain individual keeps reminding me to update my blog, otherwise I risk losing my readers. Therefore, in an effort to increase readership, here are photos of the cutest kid I know (yes, he's mine!):

Book Review: The Chosen by Chaim Potok

Grade: A-

I read The Chosen based on my wife Katie's recommendation. After reading the book in less than two days, I owe her a thank you and an apology. Katie, thank you for recommending a wonderful book. I apologize for calling it a 'kid's book,' and nearly refusing to read it. In lieu of a less-than-articulate description, I endorse the following statement from the Wall Street Journal: "Anyone who finds [The Chosen] is finding a jewel. Its themes are profound and universal. . . . It will stay on [my] bookshel[f] and be read again."--The Wall Street Journal.

In The Chosen, Potok tells the story of two Jewish boys in 1940's Brooklyn--Reuven and Daniel--who form an unlikely friendship after a baseball hit by Daniel, a Hassidic, strikes Reuven, a Modern Orthodox, in the eye. As their friendship develops, so does the social and political climate as the boys' fathers react differently to the potential for an Israeli state at the conclusion of World War II. Ultimately, the boys successfully maintain their friendship, while responsibly dealing with the conflicts between their fathers and their beliefs.

The novel's themes include the strength of friendship, the pursuit of truth, religion & the secular world, and father-son relationships; a father's advice on friendship; two views on how to raise a son; serious religious study; discussion of historic events in the context of the novel; and moral themes of family, friendship, religion, and life-long learning.