Customer Reviews

July's People (Curley Large Print Books)

5 star:		(13)
4 star:		(13)
3 star:		(8)
2 star:		(6)
1 star:		(11)

 

 

From www.thetasteland.blogspot.com


The racial tensions and possible societal disintegration that occupy the pages of Nobel Prize winning novelist Nadine Gordimer's July's People will most likely seem eerily familiar to Americans. The inferior status of blacks, the exploitative and domineering position of whites - these are American problems. Yet, Gordimer is not an American. She is South African and her novel deals not with the Civil Rights Movement or the legacy of slavery in the U.S., but rather with the disastrous consequences of Apartheid in her homeland.

Written in 1981, July's People is set in a future South Africa in which blacks have finally overthrown their white oppressors through the use of extreme violence. The society that cradled Apartheid has been destroyed, as black militias battle the white army for control. The novel centers around the Smales, a liberal white Johannesburg family and their flight from their war-torn home. But this story is not just about them - they are led from the mayhem by their servant of 15 years, a man they only know as July, who takes them to his tribal village in the nation's interior wilderness. This turning of the tables of dependency in the family and servant's relationship is what pushes this work forward.

Little "happens" as far as sustained action in July's People. The war, the fighting, the havoc is all kept on the periphery, heard through jumbled radio broadcasts, second-hand retellings, and pure speculation. What Gordimer focuses on is the interaction of her characters. Objects once meaningless, take on entirely new levels of symbolic importance in this post-Apartheid world. When they flee, July has to drive the Smales' family vehicle to avoid attracting combative attention. But once the keys are in his possession, July is hesitant to give them back, having acquired a new found power as the sole individual who has the skin color to pass in the new society. Predictably, the Smales' adaptation to this new dynamic, is less than smooth. Buried tensions come to the surface on both sides, as the characters struggle to accept their new lives. The Smales can only react and their passive response to powerless existences is provocative. The novel begs the reader to ask: What would you do if you were in this position?

What may be most interesting about July's People, is that for a novel localized around interracial relationships, none of the characters in the novel are complete, appearing as two-dimensional studies of people rather than genuine well-rounded individuals. Perhaps this is deliberate, as Gordimer wants us to focus more the issue of black-white relations than allowing our emotions to become involved. Readers might then take sides and the entire novel rotates on an axis of ambiguity, concerning everything from the motivations of the characters to what the future will bring. We are left in the same limbo as the characters and this achieves an alienating chill which overwhelms the reader. But while Gordimer succeeds in distancing our feelings from clouding our visions of the ideological conflict, this leads to some feelings of indifference. Nowhere does the reader sense the same panic as Maureen Smales as she watches July become less and less subservient and more independent over the course of her family's stay in his village. Nowhere does the reader see any shred of hope in the novel's pages. The open-ended conclusion of the work continues in this vain, leaving the reader wondering whether a situation as horrible as Apartheid can ever have a positive outcome. Strangely, as events played in reality, they did and yet this doesn't undercut the intellectual muscle of the work.

Much of this work is likely Gordimer probing her own conscious and anxieties, as a liberal South African white. The Smales' never supported Apartheid and pride themselves on how well they treated July while he was in their employment. Yet, they never did anything to change the situation either. To thinkers like Foucault or Fanon, if one does not actively try to revolt against exploitive institutions, a person is therefore indicted in the institutions' injustices. The Smales' may feel liberal guilt, but is their guilt for the lower status of blacks in society or because they don't necessarily want to give up their privileges? These are the questions Gordimer wants us to ponder.

The most revealing aspect of July's People is how all of Gordimer's characters devolve into selfishness and greed, and act largely only on part of their own interests. Her portrayal of both races is far from one-sided, far from sympathetic. While the blacks have spent decades under foreign rule in their own land, once they gain a whiff of power, they begin to fight with one another. The future society Gordimer leaves us with is one of absolute chaos and unmitigated hatreds. Even reasons for potential optimisms (like July so graciously trying to help his former employers despite the shade of their skin) are lost as time progresses and old foundations crumble. We all bear the guilt of the societies we create and the ramifications of iniquity seldom are solved through violence. Fortunately, in this case, life didn't mimic art, and Apartheid ended in a more beneficial manner than Gordimer had imagined. But her work still pertains - race relations, not just in South Africa, but worldwide remained fractured. Guns and bombs are still the path favored by governments and terrorists alike to end disputes. Gordimer shows us a world that is frightening because it is so possible. She reminds us that no change, no matter how needed or worthy, ever comes without consequences.

I don't understand the confusion over the writing. I've read other noted experimental novels that were much more difficult (ie Calvino) but writing can (and should) take so many forms, why does it always have to be predictable and follow convention? In this book the structure worked for me and I admire the way she manipulated language to create an intended mood.

What is interesting is that this is a book of conjecture or futurism, written when the anti-apartheid movement in South Africa was taking real shape and getting serious global attention, and when the white people were becoming more aware as to what was really happening in the townships (the news was heavily regulated by the apartheid regime).

Gordimer was working out what might happen if there was real violence and revolution in the streets. It must have been a very scary time, not knowing how it was all going to turn out and whether South Africa would go down the same road as other African countries where clashing clans exterminate each other on a regular basis. She had to consider what would happen if their lives would be in jeopardy to the point that they would have to flee and go in hiding. What a scary concept, one we have only recently had to contemplate after 9/11 woke us up to terror in our midst. (I personally had a fantasy of what I would put in the suitcase and which direction I would head if I felt that the attacks were going to continue).

While there was violence during the revolution in South Africa, it wasn't nearly as bad as the book projected. In reality, the revolution happened without a violent overthrow of the government but with a democratic and relatively (relative to other similar changes of government) peaceful election (thank you Mandela). The violence that occurred was sporadic, and there were bombings during the uncertain times while the government was de-stabilized. But white people weren't pulled from their homes or farms and killed in mass numbers. The way I gather it the "white flight" was from, for example, Johannesburg into the suburbs.

However, back to the novel. I thought it was a great character study and attempt to dissect what it might feel like to be forced into your worst nightmare, your world turned upside down due to civil war, how Gordimer, who likely had black servants in her household (and maybe still does?) would feel if this situation were to happen. It was her version of how one might handle the worst case scenario. Details like what she would do without tampons, and how her children adapted so easily, gave the novel depth.

People think that not much "happens" in this book, but in life things don't tend to happen with the rapidity that they do in novels or movies. Life happens slowly, and people lose sleep trying to figure out how to decide what to do next, how to handle a situation, going through the "what ifs." The big thing has happened that set the plot in motion - they were forced to leave behind their entire material lives and start over in a strange place where everything was unfamiliar and they had to rely on their servant's kindness. One by one they lost even the smallest "things" they had left that made them feel safe and like they had choices. The car was gone. The gun was taken. Even their clothes were falling apart. What more was there to lose? What do you have left when your possessions are gone? Is a marriage enough to survive on? How do you fill the empty days? It is a fascinating topic and Gordimer only scratches the surface of this complex issue.

I only give this a 4 star instead of 5 because I am really frustrated with the ending. I want to know what happened. I don't like being left hanging after getting involved with this family. I wish there was more about this from other readers.

My thought is that since it was a novel based on conjecture, she left the ending open to speculation, indicating that the future can't be predicted, and she wasn't willing to bring her "what if" to a final conclusion, anything could happen.

Just thought I'd clarify that the "dashes" that reviewers have been referring to are in fact the standard for marking dialogue in South Africa and, I might add, many other countries.

Gordimer's novel is, I think, a great work of literature that deserves to be read as much for its style and attention to detail as for its touchy and still-applicable subject matter.

I bought a copy of Nadine Gordimer's "July's People" shortly before my husband and I made our first trip to South Africa. I must confess I found the first chapter quite difficult to comprehend. I decided to put the book aside and read it after I had been in the country for a while, hoping I would find it easier to understand. And I did.
Though written during the apartheid period the book is valuable today not only as an historical document but also because sadly, in my opinion, things haven't changed much in South Africa since apartheid ended 12 years ago. Though the current government is black we found that descendants of Dutch and English settlers remain in the first world, while blacks are mainly living a third world life and working in subservient positions. True equality will take a few generations and education will play an important role in giving the majority population the skills they need for a comfortable life.
Now a bit about the book itself. July is a black servant until recently employed in a white household in Johannesburg. When rising conflict begins to threaten the lives of the family he serves, the Smales, July takes them to his home in the bush. The book concerns the adjustments that necessitates. It must be said that the elder Smales have always prided themselves in their treatment of July and their liberal politics. How to the Smales adapt to living in an insect infested hut? How do they relate to their former servant and their new neighbors, their subsistence diet and new levels of hygiene their relative status as male and female? The answers depend on which member of the Smales family you are talking about - male or female, parent or child? How does July react as the former servant, who is now above them in the social scale due to a mere change of location? What are the new relations between savior and saved?
Highly recommended to those who are more familiar with the history of South Africa than I intially was and to those with an abiding interest in the establishment of equal and harmonious conditions in the modern South Africa.

"July's People," more than anything else, is a character study, exploring how certain individuals deal with role-reversal. Set in apartheid South Africa, the white "haves" control virtually everything, while the black "have nots" are a subjugated people. But the blacks revolt, and the country is in chaos. July, the long-time black servant of the white Smalls family, takes pity on them and guides them to his own, out-of-the-way village (and safety).

In effect, July has gone from servant to savior, and the change in roles is not lost on him. He realizes the new importance he has gained, and begins to assert that authority. Before long, July sets his sights on the Smalls' family car. Because the Smalls' cannot drive it without risking capture and death, July assumes the role of driver, and soon, he is taking it out for errands without asking the Smalls' permission. This does not sit well with the Smalls who, despite their predicament, still see July as their servant (and he would never have done such a thing back home)! This is just one of many little conflicts, either real or imagined, that occur between the displaced Smalls and their host, July.

I would say this was an "OK" book, but there are two items I must mention that did not thrill me. First, the book does not have much happening in the way of actual events. It is a short book, and I suppose that's part of the reason. But even so, relatively little happens here. The Smalls have a few adventures, like meeting July's family and the other villagers, and later, meeting July's tribal chief. But there's not much beyond those events. Again, Gordimer devotes most of the book to how the characters react to their new situation, rather than creating additional ones.

Secondly, although it has been noted elsewhere, I must mention the use of punctuation in the book. Gordimer uses dashes (-) where many other marks should be (", ;, :, etc.). This made for difficult reading at first, but I will say that I did, eventually, become accustomed to it. I would recommend reading it in as few sittings as possible, however; otherwise, every time you pick up the book, you will have to "re-acquaint" yourself with Gordimer's writing style. I confess I did not like this style. More than once I found myself re-reading entire paragraphs, or even pages, because I wasn't sure which character had just spoken, or to whom. I don't find that "artistic," as others have written; just annoying.

(But don't let that be the deciding factor of whether or not you'll read it; as I mentioned, you will get used to it after a few pages.)

Final rating: three stars. Interesting concept and character study, but could have been more eventful. Punctuation/writing style didn't help.

Nadine Gordimer's 1981 novel July's People is both extremely topical and timeless. Set in the South Africa at the time of a violent overturing of apartheid by black citizens, this novel tracks a family of liberal whites, the Smales, who are taken to his bush village by their black servant, July. Although the Smales are unquestionably "liberal" and hate the apartheid system, their world is nonetheless turned upside down when forced to live as outsiders (and the only whites) in a world without plumbing, utilities, or servants such as July. In the end the Smales do not meet the challenge, although Gordimer does not pass particular judgment upon them. They, like almost anyone, can only take so much upheaval and role reversal before losing their bearings.

The legendary Ms. Gordimer has again produced a superb novel - easily the equal of her other works - with the added feature of a completely unique - and utterly delightful - approach to the use of punctuation - which consists of using dashes - and plenty of them - in place of the usual punctuation marks - with this highly interesting approach - Ms. Gordimer indulges her sense of adventure - and challenges the reader - this is a stroke of pure genius - and firmly re-establishes Ms. Gordimer as one of the finest authors in the world -

A masterpiece, containing one of the all time great lines of modern prose: "It was a miracle; it was all a miracle: and one ought to have known, from the suffering of saints, that miracles are horror."

I wouldn't be surprised if some "readers" didn't get it, however; they too often are confounded by the British tradition of now and then preferring dashes to indicated dialogue instead of quotes.

A perfect novel.

As an expatriate south african, I can safely say that Nadine gordimers' "July's People" has had an impact that I have not felt since Brink's "Dry White Season". Gordimer captures perfectly the energy, volatility, and sweet sadness of the African experience, and I speak of that experience from a colour-blind place. The fluid prose and Doctorow-like economy of punctuation gives the reader the true flavour of the culture. I cannot recommend Ms. Gordimer more highly. Her contribution to the expansive and glorious solemnity of African literature puts her in much the same league as Credo Mutwe and the luminary Laurens Van Der Post.
Read July's Children. Give yourself time, because you will be stopping to weep at regular intervals.

Bam and Maureen Smales--wealthy, white South Africans--awaken in the village of July, their servant of many years. As the revolution rages around them, the three main characters (like the country itself) discover that their identities, roles, and rules have dissolved or been reordered. "July's People" documents their struggle to redefine themselves and their relationships.

July's People is not an easy read. The complexity of Gordimer's narrative reflects the complexity of her characters and the complexity of their situation. An "easy" book would hardly serve such topics. Gordimer's writing is tight (less than 200 pages) and natural (her dialog "sounds" human). There are few writers whose skill I envy more than Gordimer's.

HIGHLY recommended.