Review: THREE WILD DOGS (AND THE TRUTH) -- [+Friday56 LinkUp]

Title: Three Wild Dogs (and the truth): a memoir by Markus Zusak

Book Beginning quote: from the Prologue -- The Wilderness Within

There's nothing like having a punch-up with your dog on a crowded city street: 

--The intersection is vast. 

--The oncoming judgment, electric.

Friday56 quote: from the chapter:  The Dog Who Knocked Me Out

There's no nonhumiliating way to put this: 

--In January of 2011, Reuben knocked me out in the park. 

--He busted my knee. I was knocked out cold.

Summary: 

What happens when the Zusak family opens their home to three big, wild, street-hardened dogs -- Reuben, more wolf than hound; Archer, blond, beautiful, destructive; and the rancorously smiling Frosty who walks like a rolling thunderstorm? The answer can only be chaos. Three Wild Dogs (and the truth) is a tender, motley, and exquisitely written memoir about the human need for both connection and disorder, a love letter to the animals who bring hilarity and beauty straight to our doors and into our lives, and change us forever (Publisher).

Review: Back in 2006/07 I read two books I absolutely adored by the same author: I Am the Messenger and The Book Thief. The author of those two books is Markus Zusak. I, and the rest of the literary world, were so enthralled by The Book Thief, in particular, we wanted more books from the author and we waited with baited breath to see what he would give us next. Well, as it turns out, Zusak was stuck with some terrible case of writer's block working on his book Bridge of Clay, which wasn't published until 2017, and he was raising a family AND three wild dogs. No wonder he didn't just churn our another international sensation each year after publishing his magnum opus. He was busy wrangling dogs. This book is that story.

As a dog lover who likes small to medium dogs and is a tiny bit afraid of big dogs, I admire a family who is willing to take on the big, wild dogs who need to be adopted, because I am not willing to do it myself. Zusak, who is obviously a fantastic writer, is also very, very funny. I am not sure when I have laughed so much over a book, especially a nonfiction one. He regales the readers with the antics of the dogs and often mortifying things the dogs did on their way to being trained, or at least better than trained than they were. The funniest bits involve Zusak imagining what the dogs/cats are saying inside their heads. And, boy, those pets have potty mouths!

In the midst of all the hilarity and anxious moments there were the precious ones, too. For example, not long after Reuben, the first wild dog, joined the family the Zusaks had their first child, a girl. The chapter title says it all -- "The dog who loved a girl." As the daughter, nicknamed Kitty, grew older and joined her parents on walks with Reuben, the dog would slow his pace and not pull at all if he knew Kitty held his leash. Kitty would host tea parties and invite Reuben to join her. He was devoted to his girl. After the Zusaks had another child, a boy named Noah, they also adopted another street dog, Archer. Archer was a gentleman and a terror. And he was always getting into trouble doing Reuben's bidding. He was like the the kid in school who didn't instigate the trouble but always got caught doing it. The dogs loved each other but also would fight each other or work in concert together to cause trouble, sometimes horrifyingly so.

Just when things finally come together and Zusak's book The Bridge of Clay is published and he goes out on book tours around the world, Reuben gets sick. Therefore his wife had to handle the bulk of the medical issues alone. I've lived through sick pets and there is nothing more agonizing for a pet owner since the pet cannot tell you how they are feeling and it is hard to know when it is time to let them go. The Zusaks agonized about their decision over Reuben. I shed big tears at this point. I've been in their shoes. Most pet owners have. After Reuben is gone Archer is a new man, but soon he, too, gets sick and goes downhill fast. After Archer is gone the family is only dogless for a few months before they adopt Frosty, who is maybe the wildest of them all. (The opening quote is about Zusak's experience trying to train Frosty.)

I love this book. It is funny and poignant. It is real and relatable. I think other animal lovers will enjoy it, too.

My rating: 4.75 stars

Even though my book group hasn't picked Three Wild Dogs for an upcoming meeting I do think it would be a great discussion book. May I suggest a few questions which should get a good discussion going:

Discussion questions:

1. What did you like best/least about the book?
2. Take turns sharing one funny/poignant pet story from your family. (If you have never had a pet, highlight one from this book or another animal situation in a book you found funny or poignant.)
3. Explain what (and the truth) means in context to the story about "wild" dogs.
4. What did you think of Zusak's writing style? All the bulleted lists? The asides?
5. Three Wild Dogs is Zusak's first nonfiction book. Name other novelists who have published other types of books that you read and liked. (Examples -- Children's books, poetry, nonfiction, memoir, graphic novels, essays, etc.) I'll get you started with a few ideas
1. John Green - a famous YA novelist (The Fault in Our Stars) wrote a book of essays (The Anthropocene Reviewed) and a new nonfiction (Everything is Tuberculosis)
2. Margaret Atwood - a Canadian novelist (A Handmaid's Tale) published a book of poetry (Dearly)
3. George Saunders - a novelist and short story writer (Lincoln in the Bardo) published a fabulous nonfiction book which could be a writer's manual (A Swim in the Pond in the Rain)
6. Which situation upset you the most? The mauling of the possum; The death of Bijoux; The episode with the piano teacher?
7. Do you agree with Camilla, a friend of the Zusak family? She said, "A pet dying is almost more devastating [than the death of a friend], because humans come and go -- they have more connections, they're out more in the world, out in their lives. But a pet is totally ours. They stay. Only we know them best. Only we really understood them. Only we can forgive them" (186).
8. React to what Zusak said, "If it's true that our lives flash before our eyes at the moment we die, I'm sure my dogs will be in the light." (219)

Sign up for The Friday56 on the Inlinkz below. 

RULES:

*Grab a book, any book

*Turn to page 56 or 56% in your e-reader (If you want to improvise, go ahead!)

*Find a snippet, but no spoilers!

*Post it to your blog and add your url to the Linky below. If you do not add the specific url for your post, we may miss it! 

*Visit other blogs and leave comments about their snippets. Expand the community. Please leave a comment for me, too!  

Also visit Book Beginnings on Friday hosted by Rose City Reader and First Line Friday hosted by Reading is My Super Power to share the beginning quote from your book.

-Anne

Classic Review: THE BROTHERS KARAMAZOV

This is the edition I recommend

The Brothers Karamazov by Fyodor Dostoevsky is one of those huge Russian tomes that ends up on almost all literary experts' lists of best books ever written. Yet I imagine few people readily pick it up and read it for their own enjoyment because the book itself is so intimidating -- it is long (the version I read is 845 pages); it is dense (long paragraphs, some are over three pages) with little white-space on each page; and it is so Russian where each character has three or four names they are called throughout the story and with very complex plotting. Despite all that The Brothers Karamazov is both a joyful book and a funny one in many ways. 

Richard Pevear, one of the translators for the bicentennial edition of Brothers, explains in his introduction that earlier translations of the text to English "revised, 'corrected,' or smoothed over Dostoevsky's idiosyncratic prose, removing much of the humor and the distinctive voicing of the novel." Based on Pevear's observation, I recommend this translation as it most closely aligns with the author's intentions. Plus more joy and lots of humor is good.

I knew little about the plot before diving into the book. A murder and a trial, I knew. Brilliant person that I am, I surmised there were brothers. What I didn't know was how each brother represents a different type of man, especially spiritually. Dmitri, the oldest brother, stands at the center, as Pevear says, "in the dark." He is a sensual man, impulsive, and dramatic. He has two half-brothers. Ivan, the next oldest, is very angry and an atheist-intellectual. Alyosha (Alexi), the youngest, is a novice monk, very kind, and spiritual. Their father, Fyodor Pavlovich Karamazov, is selfish, wicked, and sentimental. He passes onto his sons a certain force, an earthiness. Later in the novel, the trial attorneys refer to this force as Karamazovian. 

I was delighted to meet these characters in the first half of the novel, especially Alyosha. As a novice monk he was under the spiritual care of Elder Zosima who many viewed as a saint. The Elder's kindness and non-judgmental attitude drew people to him. Because he held Alyosha in high esteem we knew this brother, of the three, would be okay in the end. For several chapters in one the early books -- twelve "books" comprise the whole novel -- the Elder imparts his spiritual wisdom to those attending him before his death. His wisdom was as impactful on this 21st century girl (me) as it was for the intended 19th century reading audience. At this point in my reading I commented to my husband that I had no idea how spiritual this book is. 

Alyosha walks out of the Karamazov tragedy free, alive and sane, because he has acquired this double vision. Alyosha enters the fray, extends an ear, an eye, and a hand to his brothers in trouble. He never gives up his fundamental trust that every person is human, and therefore motivated by thirst for “pravda” [truth]. Dostoevsky leaves us with a remarkable gift: that fantastic realism which helps us see, in daily life and below its surface, the man/God struggle in process – a powerful insight of hope (Langan).

Dostoevsky came to his own spiritual awakening after being exiled to Siberia and hard labor for his part in some intellectual activity involving banned books. When he returned from Siberia his writing took on a more spiritual tone. All of his works address the human condition in troubled political, social, and spiritual times. In The Brothers Karamazov Dostoevsky shines a light on the troubles ahead for Russia, almost like a psychic foretelling of the revolution to come.

The second half of The Brothers Karamazov is a murder mystery and the trial of the eldest son, Dmitri. Once again I turned to my husband to suggest that all trial lawyers should read this book so they know how to make impactful closing statements. My husband, a retired lawyer, laughed and said several of his professors in law school suggested the same thing, encouraging their students to read the book. After listening to the 50+ pages of summation by the trial's prosecutor I thought it was a slam dunk that Dmitri would be found guilty. Then the defense lawyer stood up and made the best case ever why the brother should be acquitted. Who would think such long-winded "summations" would be so riveting?

I listened to the audio version of Brothers, all 42 hours! (Well, truthfully it was 33 hours since I reduced listening time by bumping up the speed to 1.25x.) The voice actor, Ben Miles, did an incredible job with the distinct voices of all the characters. Apparently Dostoevsky worked really hard to create distinct voices. In the 1930s his notebooks were published which showed how he gathered phrases, mannerisms, and verbal tics from which his various characters would emerge. I probably was less aware of the effort required to create unique verbal nuances for each character than a person reading the text would be because Ben Miles adroitly made each voice unique with his delivery. As a British actor he certainly did his homework to learn how to pronounce the Russian, German, and Polish words in the text.

The experience of listening to the spoken words enhanced my enjoyment of Brothers because this is essentially a novel about words -- from the Word of God to the banal language of drunkards, and everything in between.

In its composition [The Brothers Karamazov] seems to have swallowed a small library: it is full of quotations, imitations, allusions. Its characters are not only speakers; most of them are writers: they write letters, articles, pamphlets, tracts, memoirs, suicide notes. They perform, make speeches, tell jokes; they preach and confess. Words addressed, received, remembered, forgotten, carry an enormous weight in the novel and have an incalculable effect (Pevear, xx).

The narrator of The Brothers Karamazov is never identified but enters and fades from the story throughout, sometimes leaving the narration to come from the omnipotent 3rd person point-of-view and at other times showing up though inserted phrases such as, "Being at a loss to resolve these questions, I am resolved to leave them without any resolution." and "I'll leave that speech for later." Jane Austen is an author who used a similar narrative style, but I always got the sense she is the narrator. I didn't get that impression here. Dostoevsky doesn't make himself the narrator, just someone else relaying the troubled story of the three brothers. I am left with the feeling he wanted to tell much more of the story, but for the sake of brevity (snark) left some things out.

Italo Calvino defined a classic as a book which never finishes what it has to say. Forevermore the classic of classics to me will be The Brothers Karamazov. I have a sneaking suspicion if I were to reread the book tomorrow it would have something new to say to me even after such a short break between readings. "The Brothers Karamazov tackles at all levels – psychological, sociological, political and religious – some of the anguished questions of the contemporary world, ours, as well as his" (Langan). These are issues we will likely never stop grappling with. It is a classic among classics!

For the past five years I have selected to read one special book during the year. I call it my 'One Big Book Challenge.' The Brothers Karamazov was my one big book of 2025 and I couldn't be more pleased with myself to have conquered it. Several years ago I read an article by a man who had all but abandoned reading because he found today's social media so short, quick and instantly rewarding. In the article he reflected on the negative impact this had and then outlined how he got himself back to reading big books. In the article, which I cannot find, he also reflected on the what happens to our psyches when we do complete a big book, a book that took us some effort and time to complete. The perseverance required has an impact on many other aspects of our lives, leading among them the knowledge within ourselves that we CAN do hard things. After finishing The Brothers Karamazov I stumbled upon this list of 29 books we should read before we die [Brothers was on the list, of course.] Many, if not all, of the books would fall into the category of being big, hard books to read. As I looked over the list I felt my determination rising to finish the 11 remaining that I haven't read yet. Heck, I can read hard books and I can do lots of hard things in my life. Moby-Dick, Anna Karenina, Crime and Punishment, A Tale of Two Cities, which of you is next?

-Anne