Poisonwood Bible

[sacrilicious]

Has anyone else read this book? It's about an American fundie family going on a missionary trip to the Belgian Congo in 1959, and told from the perspective of the four children (all daughters.) The father is this batshit crazy preacher and right up this forum's alley for discussion.

[jaelh]

Has anyone else read this book? It's about an American fundie family going on a missionary trip to the Belgian Congo in 1959, and told from the perspective of the four children (all daughters.) The father is this batshit crazy preacher and right up this forum's alley for discussion.

I love that book. Not so much for the religious analysis: it could be any "save the world" expat. I know, most of them as less crazy than that papa. but it is, for many, greatly diluted strains of the same. There is a line in there when they're leaving - something like africa changed us but we didn't leave so much as a ripple on the surface of africa. that should be tattooed on the forearm of every missionary, volunteer, aid worker, student exchange participant, researcher etc...

[maybeizfundie]

Read it a long time ago.

Totally bizarre, but I couldn't put it down. I like jaelh's assessment of it, too.

[emmiedahl]

I am actually re-reading it right now. I am woefully out of material and don't want to wash my hair so I can go to the library, so I grabbed it randomly.

Good read, but a little appalling. Especially when the "patriarch" was pushing his older daughter away from the plane that came to take them to safety.

[Avalondaughter]

One of my all-time favorite books. I am less disturbed by the "save the world" mentality of any of its characters than I am by the descriptions of the actions by our government. The US to all intents and purposes murdered a popularly elected, democratic leader just to make sure we furthered our own economic interests. Made me sick.

[InkyGirl]

I reread Poisonwood Bible after discovering freejinger and all our fundies and I got so much more out of it. The first time I read it (sometime in high school) I didn't really like it; the sister who writes and talks backwards got annoying to read, plus I was a little more religiously uptight back then.

The father is insane and I felt sorry for the poor mother but was angry with her at the same time.

A great read all around.

[auntdoc]

Couldn't put it down when I read it years ago. It reminded me of when I was a fundie.

[Shirley MacLaine]

I wasn't that into it when I read it in high school, although it was fairly entertaining. I'm glad I read it, though, because it piqued my interest in the history of the Congo / US involvement in Africa generally.

[Guest Anonymous]

I, too, read it in highschool and really enjoyed it. I wish I could read it again but I have ADD and I just can't re-read books (or re-watch movies or shows) that I've seen before.

[contrary]

it took me three tries, over several years, to get through the first hundred pages, and i'm so glad i did! It absorbed me and made me cry and think. It's in my Permanent Collection, and i've re-read it several times (i very rarely re-read, so the only books that make my Permanent Collection have to be ones i'd read again).

I have not read it since i've become a FJ'ite, and am looking forward to the next round with my new fundie education.

[Witsec7]

Seems to be a good time as any to start a discussion on this, considering the interest that has been shown.

First a brief overview from Kingsolvers website

The Poisonwood Bible is a story told by the wife and four daughters of Nathan Price, a fierce, evangelical Baptist who takes his family and mission to the Belgian Congo in 1959. They carry with them everything they believe they will need from home, but soon find that all of it—from garden seeds to Scripture—is calamitously transformed on African soil. What follows is a suspenseful epic of one family's tragic undoing and remarkable reconstruction over the course of three decades in postcolonial Africa.

I read this when it first came out, when I was deep into exploring the political influence of fundies in America. At that time I wasn't engaged in the mechanisms of suppression used by fundies, or their individual personalities. After my reread last week I came to recognize how spot on Kingsolver was in portraying a fundy family and the tools that their patriarch used in imposing his world view on all.

To start the discussion I'll pose a question, 'How relative do you think this novel is, when we view todays current crop of missionary fundies?".

Does Nathan resemble any of the fundies we discuss, my guess Shrader is the first to come to mind. They are a bit more fundy than the Prices, more kids, frumpers, living in poverty prior to their mission. But overall just as blind and idealistic as the Prices when they left for Africa.

Like Mike Meyers character on SNL would say, 'Let's have some coffee and talk."

riffle

[Arete]

Found the thread! :dance: You had written that it was in Chatter, and I kept scrolling up and down. Then it occured to me to look in Worldly Distractions.

To be honest, Nathan pings me as a Steve Maxwell type. Admittedly, a part of that could be that I have pondered Steve Maxwell a lot more than the Schraders. But there are other parallels I see. Maxwell served in Vietnam, and I can't believe that that experience wouldn't shape his theological worldview. Same way that while Nathan has the components for going religiously combustible before he enters WW2, it's his experience there that drives the rest of his life. I think they carry the same attitudes toward their wives and female offspring. Occasions of sin or the results of occasions of sin they need to control. I think both the fictional character and the real man secretly consider sex shameful, even within marriage, and hate that they have those urges. Not people with their own individual needs. Both are into captive audiences they call churches. Both are cold human beings. Of course Steve Maxwell would never dream of exposing his family to missionary work because it is impossible to isolate your family from society without US modern conveniences. Steve M. is also a carbon copy of Nathan in that while he is fine with being an authority, he cannot submit to the authority of elders in a church.

Now, as to the whole missionary endevour, there's lots of common ground between the Prices and the Shraders. But the fictional Prices still have an "ace" the real life Shraders don't have: a mother who grew up normal and had passions in life before marriage and children. Orleanna is able to pick up those tools again and rebuild her life. Esther doesn't have tools and has no interest in learning to use them. Orleanna's fears and concerns always revolved around her children. Esther's focus is her husband's happiness. It's the focus of all these women who are fundy from birth. If things went tits up in Zambia, I don't think Esther is capable of TRYING to save her children. She also isn't smart enough or humble enough to realize SHE needs to observe and learn whatever she can from this new culture. It will be about how many baptisms can we perform, not can we make a small difference and maybe learn something along the way. Drives me crazy that the only thing most of these missions do is replace local male dominance models with a Western male dominance model.

[MysteryHaggis]

I'm a lurker tempted out by this thread, so,hi! :) I actually re-read TPB after reading about a missionary family who seemed to be struggling on here-can't remember their names now, it was a while ago.

I would also agree that Nathan seems more of a Steve Maxwell than a Shrader, partially due to Maxwell and Price's common trait of ridiculing outsiders. Obviously with the Prices there is the racist element also, but I see a definite similarity between Price's incredulity at the way the villagers act-i.e., mostly ignore his righteous anger- and Steve's extreme "my way or the highway" mentality, even though "his way" isn't working out- see for example Poor Sarah's singledom.

It's not really related to the question but what struck me when reading the books was the similarity between Nathan Price's patriarchal selfishness (going to the Congo, uprooting his whole family because HE SAID SO so put up and shut up) in the 1950s and fundie fathers now (BRADRICK would be the most similar, I think). I think the Prices could write a blog now and the content would be exactly the same. Even down to the hope chests for future weddings. I would have thought even fundiedom would move forward in nearly 60 years, but apparently not.

Orleanna reminds me of Kelly Bradrick, rightly or wrongly, suffering to soothe her husband's ego. At least Orleanna managed to escape.

[Turtle]

I'm a lurker tempted out by this thread, so,hi! :) I actually re-read TPB after reading about a missionary family who seemed to be struggling on here-can't remember their names now, it was a while ago.

I would also agree that Nathan seems more of a Steve Maxwell than a Shrader, partially due to Maxwell and Price's common trait of ridiculing outsiders. Obviously with the Prices there is the racist element also, but I see a definite similarity between Price's incredulity at the way the villagers act-i.e., mostly ignore his righteous anger- and Steve's extreme "my way or the highway" mentality, even though "his way" isn't working out- see for example Poor Sarah's singledom.

It's not really related to the question but what struck me when reading the books was the similarity between Nathan Price's patriarchal selfishness (going to the Congo, uprooting his whole family because HE SAID SO so put up and shut up) in the 1950s and fundie fathers now (BRADRICK would be the most similar, I think). I think the Prices could write a blog now and the content would be exactly the same. Even down to the hope chests for future weddings. I would have thought even fundiedom would move forward in nearly 60 years, but apparently not.

Orleanna reminds me of Kelly Bradrick, rightly or wrongly, suffering to soothe her husband's ego. At least Orleanna managed to escape.

I think there is a racist element with modern missionaries such as the Shraders, ect. Maybe it is slightly more subtle, but definitely there. Especially with those attempting to evangelize those who already consider themselves Christian. The implication there is that the white/American Christians are doing it right, and the black/Africans are not...and aren't they lucky that these white Americans are coming over there to show them the way?

I agree with you about Nathan Price and the blogs, especially blogs that talk about child "training". Might makes right. Nathan obviously couldn't cope with any opposition from his family, so he used his strength/violence to "win". Plenty of fundie bloggers seem to go the same route.

[MysteryHaggis]

I think there is a racist element with modern missionaries such as the Shraders, ect. Maybe it is slightly more subtle, but definitely there. Especially with those attempting to evangelize those who already consider themselves Christian. The implication there is that the white/American Christians are doing it right, and the black/Africans are not...and aren't they lucky that these white Americans are coming over there to show them the way?

I agree with you about Nathan Price and the blogs, especially blogs that talk about child "training". Might makes right. Nathan obviously couldn't cope with any opposition from his family, so he used his strength/violence to "win". Plenty of fundie bloggers seem to go the same route.

I agree with you. In the 50s/60s though- especially considering the Prices' Southern origins- racism would be much more mainstream, no? As in, not a fundie trait as such. I didn't think the Prices were any more racist than a less religious white family would be in the same situation. I could be wrong, though.

I didn't think of the "Evangelising existing Christians" angle, that's a good point.

[Arete]

In terms of a racist element in modern missionaries, the scope is actually wider than skin color racism and missionizing of one Christian sect by another Christian sect is not a modern phenomena. Catholics have sent missions and established churches in predominantly orthodox countries of the same cultural level, some Protestant missionaries go after well established Catholic and Orthodox communities in Europe. It's called "sheep stealing". Then of course, there are what I will generically term "Aglosphere" Protestant missionaries that go in and muck up established Christian communities in Africa because they think African Christianity is idolatrous, not biblically centered, etc. This definitely has the nasty undertones of racism and "saving the savages from falling into heresy" though I'm not sure if the Shraders level of racism is anything like the Prices. The Price family's story is set in a time and place where you were most likely heavily influenced by racism whether you were religious or secular.

I'm going to throw this question out there because I just can't seem to form any kind of answer. In this day and age, 2012, why do African governments still allow so many missionaries in? They cause so much damage. There are other organizations willing to help set up and supply clinics, dig wells, distribute medicine, and no religious motivations to speak of, except in individuals who feel they are called to help where they can. My friends from India tell me that missionaries are often kicked out of the country for proselytizing and disturbing the peace. Their numbers are much less and they tend to be a lot more circumscept. You'll have nuns and lay brothers under strict discipline to establish schools and avoid religious confrontation or conversion of minors without their parents permission. Why are missionaries still allowed to essentially run amok in Africa? You can't tell me the Shraders or the fictional Prices have any useful skills or insights to offer. And they are still allowed in.

[fakepigtails73]

Seems to be a good time as any to start a discussion on this, considering the interest that has been shown.

First a brief overview from Kingsolvers website

I read this when it first came out, when I was deep into exploring the political influence of fundies in America. At that time I wasn't engaged in the mechanisms of suppression used by fundies, or their individual personalities. After my reread last week I came to recognize how spot on Kingsolver was in portraying a fundy family and the tools that their patriarch used in imposing his world view on all.

To start the discussion I'll pose a question, 'How relative do you think this novel is, when we view todays current crop of missionary fundies?".

Does Nathan resemble any of the fundies we discuss, my guess Shrader is the first to come to mind. They are a bit more fundy than the Prices, more kids, frumpers, living in poverty prior to their mission. But overall just as blind and idealistic as the Prices when they left for Africa.

Like Mike Meyers character on SNL would say, 'Let's have some coffee and talk."

riffle

Old topic, sorry!

I read it last May...I'd say that Nathan Pryce reminds me of Matt Chancey, the whole "white missionary Lord Of Africa" vibe. The wife reminds me of Mama Maxwell. The daughter who doesn't speak for her childhood and then becomes a bio chemist in the US reminds me of Joy Anna (she was my fave narrator). I loved that she finally started to speak when she escaped her fundie life. Rachel, the snobby eldest daughter that ended up marrying a rich man and opening a inn somewhere in Africa is totally Erin Bates. The youngest daughter, being very mischievous reminds me of Johannah Duggar. The daughter who married a Congolese man and had kids reminds me of Suzannah Keller.

I liked that book. It's not one of the best book I've ever read, but it was well-done.

edited for riffles