Post your thoughts and questions... and begin thinking about what you want to do for your FINAL report presentation. You'll be selecting either a novel of your own choice OR an author whose work you want to introduce us to (or elaborate on, if it happens to be one we're all reading).
- Is bad sleep "the result of nothing more than being alive," at Frank's age? 172 (If you're a sound sleeper, Frank and both welcome your advice.)
- "Sick is more than normal here [at Mayo Clinic]--sick is good." 173 What does Frank mean?
- Does the "brawny Black athlete... with his glamorous white wife" raise another red flag regarding the author's racial attitudes? 176 Or Meegan? 178 Or Krista's reference to her husband's dad as "Colored"? 197 Or "the unfriendly Black lawyer lady"? 217, 227
- Do humans celebrate too much? 182-3
- What do you make of Paul's "way since he was thirteen-a skilled escape artist from life's drab everyday"? 190 Has it been his way of being existentially "authentic," of not taking anything seriously, or... ?
- If Heidegger "puts me dead to sleep in five minutes," why is that "all I ask of it"? 192
- "See Mount Rushmore and die-that's my motto." 194 How would you characterize what Heidegger would call his "Being-towards-death"? ["Heidegger’s "Being-towards-death" (Sein-zum-Tode) defines human existence (Dasein) as inherently finite, where authentic life requires consciously anticipating death as one's ownmost, non-relational, and unavoidable possibility. Instead of a morbid end, death is the "possibility of the impossibility" of existence, providing the boundary that forces individuals to take ownership of their lives, escape conforming to the crowd ("the they"), and act with freedom and responsibility."]
- "People come to the end, and they think they can negotiate that. Then I have to explain it to them." 195 What do you imagine Nurse Krista explains? In general, does the medical profession do a good job of talking honestly with terminal patients about their prognosis?
- Comment?: “Our ultimate goal, after all, is not a good death but a good life to the very end.”
― Atul Gawande, Being Mortal: Medicine and What Matters in the End - Comment?: “A few conclusions become clear when we understand this: that our most cruel failure in how we treat the sick and the aged is the failure to recognize that they have priorities beyond merely being safe and living longer; that the chance to shape one’s story is essential to sustaining meaning in life; that we have the opportunity to refashion our institutions, our culture, and our conversations in ways that transform the possibilities for the last chapters of everyone’s lives.”
― Atul Gawande, Being Mortal: Medicine and What Matters in the End - Comment?: "We’ve been wrong about what our job is in medicine. We think our job is to ensure health and survival. But really it is larger than that. It is to enable well-being. And well-being is about the reasons one wishes to be alive. Those reasons matter not just at the end of life, or when debility comes, but all along the way. Whenever serious sickness or injury strikes and your body or mind breaks down, the vital questions are the same: What is your understanding of the situation and its potential outcomes? What are your fears and what are your hopes? What are the trade-offs you are willing to make and not willing to make? And what is the course of action that best serves this understanding?” ― Atul Gawande, Being Mortal: Medicine and What Matters in the End
- What does it mean to be spiritual "in a fortune teller way"? Does Krista's advice to Frank seem wise to you? 199
- Why do you think Frank mentions "Melville's whale"? 201 Are Frank and Paul hunting a metaphorical whale?
- What do you make of Frank's "global amnesia"? 201
- What does Frank mean when he says Detroit "does good enough for America"? 203
- Are you surprised that Ford mentions "Making Greenland a state. Bombing Puerto Rico." Etc.? 204
- "Nothing would make me happier... the watery sunshine of early March." 205 Same! Can any of you also relate?
- Do you hope "death is like a lightbulb going off"? Is it "freeing" to you to think so? 209 It wouldn't be, would it, if it were a rheostat? 219
- What does Frank mean about Mount Rushmore being "most notional... most American"? Is he right about "how much lighter on its feet the world would be"etc.? 216
- Can too much news really prevent us from forming "reliable opinions"? 221
- "I'm not worried about dying, okay?" 229 Is Paul being honest with himself?
- Would you enjoy visiting the Corn Palace? Why are "connections between the heartfelt and the preposterous" Paul's "yin and yang"? 231, 234
- Was Disneyland (-world) a highlight of your childhood?
- "You don't get to choose everything." 237 What would the Existentialists say about this?
- "My daughter can churn up deranging effects in me." 238 Do any family members have this effect on you?
- What's wrong with Scottsdale? 240
- What's the difference between acting weird and being weird? 242
- Is Frank right about "the key to happiness"? 243
- What is laughing, if not a "bodily function"? 246 Is it indispensable for a good life?
- Is being old really like having a fatal disease? 247 (What about the U-curve?)
- Leaving the last 19 pages this week to you...
23. Disneyland or Disney World was never a highlight of my childhood. I was raised for most of my childhood by a single mother. My brothers and I understood that if we asked for a trip like that, our mom would have worked herself to exhaustion trying to make such an expensive vacation happen. That likely would have meant we would see even less of her.
ReplyDeleteBecause of that, we chose quality time over extravagant moments. We valued being present with our mom more than taking a trip that would have added pressure to her shoulders. That said, there is nothing wrong with visiting Disneyland or Disney World. It simply was not the priority for our family at the time.
It's over-rated, in my opinion. The magic was lost on me, both in childhood and when we took our kids. But I've known grown adults who go almost nowhere else, but who do go back year after year.... much as my late dad went back multiple times to Mount Rushmore. Its allure also eluded me. But I'm not Paul Bascombe. (Thank goodness!)
DeleteI wonder if it’s the Disney attractions, memories, or the social status of going that draws in the most tourism.
Delete20. I believe that too much of anything can hinder our ability to focus, which can also prevent us from forming thoughtful and reliable opinions. When we constantly consume the news, it can become overwhelming and make the world seem more dangerous than it actually is.
ReplyDeleteFor example, crime reporting in Nashville is a daily occurrence. However, the coverage can overshadow the fact that many investigations develop over time or that incidents take place in different parts of the city. News outlets may also highlight more striking statistics to capture attention.
This is why I believe it is important to use categories to narrow our focus. Even politics on its own can feel overwhelming. When crime coverage is combined with political commentary, it can heighten fear and influence decisions, such as feeling the need to install a new alarm system. Being intentional about what we consume allows us to think more critically and maintain perspective.
Agreed. But I do think Ford intends us to be amused by Paul's statement, and struck by the USA Today's quotidian variety of "journalism" as symptomatic of a generally under- and mis-informed public.
Delete16. I was surprised to see Ford mention this because it still feels relevant today. I think he was/is very politically aware, or perhaps during his year of study he closely observed politicians and the broader political climate so that he could creatively weave it into Be Mine. He clearly understood the threats associated with this administration. In my view, it is disappointing that he portrays the administration as contributing to destruction rather than supporting the average American.
ReplyDeleteWell, I was surprised because I didn't think Greenland and PR were quite on our radar yet when Be Mine was published. I do think he's been a closer observer of Trumpian trend lines than I have been.
DeleteAm I understanding you to claim that the Trump administration is "supporting the average American" and not "contributing to destruction"? Surely you're not saying that!
No, I am saying that even Ford knows that Trump is connected to destruction and chaos rather than supporting the average working American.
DeleteWhy does Frank explicitly identify the race of all black characters, such as the well-dressed attorney? Couldn’t she have been described solely based on her attire, hairstyle, vehicle, or her actions, like leaving Frank hanging? Why does Frank keep emphasizing that black people are black?
ReplyDeleteFair question. I don't know. I'd like to ask him. And Richard.
DeleteQuestions for the class to think about ahead of my discussion tomorrow. (Feel free to answer now and elaborate more in class or wait to share your thoughts then.)
ReplyDelete1. On page 226, Frank says this about Paul, “Once again, he is more adaptable than I am, most happy to focus on what’s in front of him.” Throughout the novel, we’ve seen Paul keeping things from Frank, such as his initial ALS diagnosis, and doesn’t share all of his thoughts with his father. We also see Paul lying about what’s going on in his life, such as on page 250 when he admits to Frank he lied about Candice. My question is, do you think this statement from Frank is true about Paul based on what we’ve seen of him throughout the novel or is this just how Frank views, or more so, wants to his son?
2. On pages 254-55, Frank recollects a time when he was living in New Jersey in the 90s about seeing a man on the beach with his child son. He imagines the father thinking, “I’m going through the motions here. I should be there. I could be heading toward a new horizon, a different sunrise. Yet, I’m here, on the continent’s edge my wee ones, doing that life has ordained. It is not sad, not fraudulent in the least. Though, yes, there could be more, or other.” And to that Frank remarks, “Yes. Happiness can still be yours … since happiness is not a pure element like Manganese or Boron, but an alloy of metals both precious and base, and durable.” My question here is in two parts, which can be answered together or separately. Part A – Do you think there is such a thing as “going through the motions” in life? Does this make every day less worthy of living if you’re constantly longing for something else? Part B – What do you make of Frank’s metal alloy analogy for happiness?
Question 3 – Frank’s continued usage of racist, negative and unfaltering descriptions of all the Black characters is consistent and are intentional choices. The Black women tend to be seen a little more positively at first when Frank meets them, but that fades the more he interacts with them, and it seeps into his narrative and view of them. (Overall, women tend to have better descriptions from Frank than men in general, but that is not given to Meegan and the lawyer.)
ReplyDeleteWhile Frank is a liberal, he still holds racist views, unintentionally or not, that comes through whenever he interacts with anyone who is Black. What a character does is not always tied directly to the author’s viewpoints, but it is still a choice on Ford’s part in writing Frank to constantly point out when a character non-white and doesn’t have anything at least neutral to say about them. It is like Markeem said in his previous response, why does Frank, and by extension Ford, always explicitly state when someone is black?
This does lead into a thought I’ve had since the first time we saw Frank speak this way. Just because someone is a liberal doesn’t mean they are not racist. It also means they can still have work to do on unlearning the institutional racism they were raised with, especially with some older individuals. Frank is an example of this type of white liberal.
Being liberal should at least mean having non-racist intentions and aspirations. It bothers me, now that I'm aware of it, that Frank (Richard?) is so explicitly drawn to race as a narrative mark of identity. But does that make him racist, if his intentions and aspirations are good? Distinctions should be drawn. And it's worth noting that those who say they NEVER see race are also often pegged as harboring unconscious racist attitudes. A thoughtful son of Mississippi like Ford must have given all of this a lot of thought. Maybe not enough.
DeleteFord addressed race in a 2017 BBC interview:
Delete"The people who voted for Trump are people that I ought to know because I’m from the South: I’m from a red state. I ought to have a different sense of those people’s lives …
RM: And you’re a white male, aren’t you?
RF: So far. Because look, they’re not all bigots, all right? They’re not all racists, they’re not all Obama-haters. Some really are rust belt unemployed who think, rightly or wrongly, that immigrants are taking their jobs.
RM: And if a young student at an American university came to you and said that they feel some of the things you’ve described to me, what would your advice be to such a young American faced with a Trump presidency?
RF: Register to vote. And also, once you register to vote, vote, and vote your conscience. That’s no different really from what I would have advised somebody 10 or 20 years ago. I wrote a piece in The Guardian in which I said basically, as regards this last election, blame ourselves for this. We are the citizens of this country. Blame ourselves if we have someone like Trump, and our only recourse is to fall back upon our sense of citizenship.
RM: You were born in 1944, so you’re an older man. How would the young Ford have responded to this?
RF: The young Ford actually was born in Jackson Mississippi into an apartheid environment. God only knows what I would have experienced at that point with everybody around me sort of intolerant to the prospect of blacks gaining a fair shake at things. When your environment is toxic like that, as mine was, who knows what I would have thought. I felt lucky to be able to get out of Mississippi in 1962 and most of what I have done with myself intellectually since then has been to try to cure myself of that.
RM: That’s really interesting because, for the founding fathers, if we go back to the beginning, race – which is what you’re partly talking about – was one of the issues that they were afraid of, wasn’t it? I think there’s a famous letter where Jefferson talks about the race question awakening him in the night ‘like a fire bell’…
RF: Jefferson was peculiarly compromised by the race issue. The founding fathers could see into the next century, that race was going to become a problem because all of these people had been imported into the United States against their wills as chattels; they were soon going to accumulate and were going to need to be reckoned with, – and it scared them to death, as it should have. It’s the founding fathers’ perfidiousness about race, in a way that they could understand.
RM: But you’re also saying, aren’t you, that race remains one of the great faultlines in American society?
RF: It will always be thus. When you have as many decades as we had in the United States in which again human beings were imported against their will as chattels and then an enormous civil war was fought to keep them as chattel, that just doesn’t heal up. Certainly not in my lifetime – probably not in anybody’s foreseeable lifetime – is the issue of race going to be solved in the United States. Even with as wonderful a man as Obama has been…
RM: Do you feel broadly speaking optimistic about the future of America?
DeleteRF: Well yes, and I do for some reasons. One is that Mrs Clinton got almost three million more votes than Mr Trump did: that is reason for optimism. There is reason to think that Americans, if they had to vote again today, might vote differently.
RM: So what were the voters’ motives in not voting for her?
RF: I think there were a lot of motives in not voting for her. There were all of those people who hated Obama who were in fact nativists and bigots, and who saw her as the possible President [who would] just carry on his programmes. There are people who didn’t vote for her who are simply nihilists, who want to wreck the government and destroy civil order. There are people who are social conservatives who held their noses and voted for Trump rather than Mrs Clinton simply because they wanted to assure the country of having the most conservative Supreme Court that we can have. And then there are people who are just simply ignorant, who don’t pay much attention to government, who don’t have an interest in government, and who are for that reason susceptible to being lied to by Trump and who were then lied to.
RM: Does Trump represent some kind of dark side of the American psyche?
RF: Yes. Unqualifyingly he does, but I don’t think it’s any darker than the English psyche or the Scottish psyche or the Eritrean psyche. I think there is a dark side to everybody’s psyche and you do your best to try to subordinate it to the better angels that you hear..."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/2dCKkv1Xr0vMcJl0gw0nV3X/richard-ford-on-writing-the-new-america
The question about what advice to offer a young disaffected American reminds me of David Brooks's recent response to that question... If you were 18 going into college (me right now) and feeling morally unsure about the state of the world, what would you do to try to make a difference? — Ali Ibanez, Tampa, Fla.
DeleteYour generation has inherited from mine a society in a state of social, emotional and spiritual crisis. If I were 18, I think I'd work really hard to try to learn the skills that would enable me to treat other people with consideration and respect in the concrete circumstances of life: How do you sit with someone who is depressed or grieving? How do you ask someone out, fall in love and, when necessary, break up with someone without crushing his or her heart? How do you become a great conversationalist? These are the skills that artificial intelligence will not replace, and they are the ones that will make you a good person who has a glowing influence on the people right around you. There are many people teaching these social skills in books and online, but many people don't bother to master them..."
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/13/opinion/david-brooks-leaving.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share
14. What do you make of Frank's "global amnesia"? 201
ReplyDeleteSince this book is recent, I think "global amnesia" is something that many people have, to an extent. That might come from a lack of critical thinking or indifference. This can range from current global events to media literacy.
16. Are you surprised that Ford mentions "Making Greenland a state. Bombing Puerto Rico." Etc.? 204
I found this to be interesting, especially since people tend to rewrite history (i.e., global amnesia) when it comes to questioning the existence of Puerto Rico and the unnecessary desire to claim Greenland is a territory. It's odd considering Puerto Rico is a U.S. territory, but it is often forgotten in the face of backhanded racism. Nonetheless, the book does mention recent government affairs. The fact that Frank brings it up, it has a tone of disappointment mixed with sarcasm, almost as if he is referencing "destroying what we have and taking what can't have access to".
17. "Nothing would make me happier... the watery sunshine of early March." 205 Same! Can any of you also relate?
"Watery sunshine" is a descriptive way to phrase it. Many people also consider spring the "real new year", since winter is transitioning into spring. "Watery sunshine" also sounds symbolic. Think of rain and sunshine; purification; sun showers; maybe even deception
I think Frank's "watery sunshine" is an allusion to the environs of Port Saint Lucie, Florida, where he imagines taking in a Spring Training game between the Mets and Cards. I've been there and done that, and can definitely relate to the experience as a wonderful harbinger in Spring as a season but also as a time of spiritual renewal.
DeleteGlobal amnesia is an actual neurological condition, not just a dearth of critical thinking or the like, according to AI:
ReplyDeleteTransient global amnesia (TGA) is a temporary, sudden-onset memory loss episode where individuals cannot form new memories (anterograde amnesia) or recall recent events, often for 1–8 hours, though up to 24 hours. While disoriented, they retain personal identity and alertness. It is rare, usually affects people over 50, and typically does not recur.
Causes and Triggers
The exact cause is unknown, but it is believed to be linked to transient dysfunction of the hippocampus, possibly due to venous congestion, impaired blood flow, or migraine-related mechanisms. Triggers often include:
Strenuous physical activity.
Sudden, extreme hot or cold water immersion.
Emotional distress or acute stress.
Sexual intercourse.
Valsalva maneuvers (e.g., straining).
Symptoms
Sudden memory loss: Inability to form new memories (short-term) and loss of recent memories (long-term memory remains intact).
Repetitive questioning: Asking the same questions repeatedly (e.g., "Where am I?", "How did I get here?").
Disorientation: Confusion about time or place.
Intact cognition: Retained ability to recognize people and perform complex tasks.
Duration and Long-Term Effects
Duration: Episodes last for a few hours, usually under 6 to 8 hours, and never exceed 24 hours.
Recovery: Memory of the event itself is typically lost forever, but full cognitive function returns.
Long-Term Effects: TGA is considered harmless and generally does not increase the risk of stroke, epilepsy, or dementia.
Risk Factors
Age over 50 (most common 50–70 years).
History of migraines.
Disclaimer: Although typically benign, sudden, severe, or recurrent memory loss warrants immediate medical evaluation to rule out other, more serious conditions such as stroke or seizures.
3. Does the "brawny Black athlete...with his glamorous white wife" raise another red flag regarding the author's racial attitudes? 176 Or Meegan? 178 Or Krista's reference to her husband's dad as "Colored"? 197 Or "the unfriendly Black lawyer lady"? 217, 227
ReplyDeleteThe brawny Black athlete/glamorous white wife line didn’t bother me. For the most part, neither did the passage about Meegan. Although the way Ford described Meegan’s skin did come across as a bit fetishizing, this may not have been his intention. The Meegan passage struck me as an attempt by the author to “cover his own ass” so as not to be thought of as racist. It’s as if when he sat down to write this passage, he thought, “Oh crap! My descriptions of Black MEN in this book aren’t very positive, so I better write about this Black WOMAN in the most flattering way I can so nobody thinks I have a problem with Black people.”
Regarding Krista’s comment, I think she was parroting the language that would’ve been used during the time (pre-Civil Rights era) when her husband’s father was in the workforce as a way to mock the people who would have used such language. Black Americans were at one point called “Colored,” but nobody uses that term anymore because it has a racist connotation (just as people no longer refer to female college students as “coeds” because of that word’s sexist connotation). I think Krista is aware of this and was attempting to make a joke about how blatantly racist people were “back then.” Was it appropriate for this white woman to refer to her Black husband’s father (even jokingly) as “Colored”? Probably not. Did she have malicious intent? Also probably not. Regardless, she shouldn’t be given a pass just because she’s married to a Black man. This has the same energy as “I can say the n-word because I have Black friends.”
I found Ford’s/Frank’s description of "the unfriendly Black lawyer lady” to be problematic because it evokes harmful stereotypes about Black women. Black women are often stereotyped—especially by white men—as “unfriendly,” “aggressive,” “unpleasant,” etc. Although I understand Frank’s perspective—his well-meaning attempt to make congenial conversation with a stranger failed and, as a result, his pride was hurt—I also understand the lady’s perspective. In her mind, this white man’s attempt to change the subject when she brought up the US’s long history of oppression and racism was cowardly and dismissive. And because he tried to steer the conversation toward the Democrats’ shaky prospects in the upcoming election, she might have misread him as a Trump supporter/bigot. She is well within her right to discontinue a conversation with someone she thinks might be a bigot in order to protect her peace, and doing so doesn’t make her “unfriendly.”
I don't think Ford is trying to cover anything, that would imply that he knows himself to have a race problem. Maybe he does; but I don't think HE thinks he does. For similar reasons, I don't think anyone in Ford's fictional universe would ever mistake Frank for a MAGA/Trumpist. He thinks of himself as a progressive liberal, and in fact is one in most respects.
DeleteDon't know why it made me Anonymous. jpo
Delete19. What does Frank mean about Mount Rushmore being "most notional...most American"?
ReplyDeleteBased on the definition of “notional” (existing only in theory or the imagination), I think Frank means that Mount Rushmore has no inherent meaning other than what Americans ascribe to it. Rushmore is an important monument solely because some white person decades ago decided it should be. If you think about it, the very existence of a United States (just like Mount Rushmore) is a fabricated, notional concept. When white settlers arrived in the land now known as “America,” they ascribed their own meanings to places based on their own interpretations. They often ignored the meanings Indigenous peoples ascribed to these places and superimposed their own meanings on top. Manhattan island became “New York City” after white settlers banished the Lenape people and renamed the land. Part of the Black Mountains (which are sacred to the Dakota people) became “Mount Rushmore” after the US government blasted it with dynamite and carved in the images of four US presidents. Mount Rushmore is the most notional and American of American monuments because of the superimposition of a completely arbitrary meaning.
When you think about it, aren't most aspects of our public lives notional in this sense? Pretty much everything depends on our mutual ascription of meaning and significance. Do any of our national monuments speak entirely for themselves, in this respect?
DeleteMy late father, growing up on a mid-Missouri farm, didn't pay much attention to news of the wider world but did find the construction of Rushmore compelling. I think he was struck by the architectural challenge. I don't think he had much "notion" of its national/historical significance back then. Later I think it did take on patriotic/nationalistic notional meaning for him. But it was in fact an architectural and engineering feat.
AI: Mount Rushmore was constructed between 1927 and 1941 under sculptor Gutzon Borglum, featuring the 60-foot heads of4 US presidents carved into South Dakota granite. Over 400 workers used dynamite for 90% of the removal, followed by jackhammers and drills to finish the faces. Despite dangerous, high-altitude work, no fatalities occurred during the 14-year project.
Did it again!
Delete20. Can too much news really prevent us from forming "reliable opinions"? 221
ReplyDeleteYes and no. Too much news certainly can prevent us from forming reliable opinions by overloading our brains with so much information at once that we can’t process it all (paralysis by analysis). But at the same time, it’s impossible to form a truly reliable opinion about anything without being educated/made aware of it. The problem with much of mainstream journalism is that it provides breadth of coverage but not depth. It provides the “what” but not the “why.” News outlets spit out headlines without diving deeper into those headlines. As such, we might know that a shooting happened in Minnesota, but we don’t know why it happened or what events led up to it. A lot of what’s missing is context. The problem isn’t “too much news.” The problem is too much news with too little context.
Yes, but that's not Paul's complaint. He wants less information, not necessarily more context. The best journalism, which I think the NYT still commits on a pretty regular basis, provides context galore. Most Americans seem to have no time for it.
DeleteThat's better. (Forgot to look for the drop-down menu that lets you select your Google account.)
ReplyDelete