First Lines: January 2026 edition

I would have to say, looking back over the month’s reading, that there is a thread running through most of these six books: patriarchy.  

Dearest Blog Reader, in the likely event that you do not read any of my blathering below, I will ask you now – what’s in your book stack these days?

Book 1

Cordelia

I didn’t know how long I sat cross-legged in the snow, waiting for the dead man crumpled on the ground in front of my building to wake up. 

 

 

Book 2

I’m here because two people broke a promise to God.

 

 

Book 3

Scene - Dr Stockmann’s sitting room.  It is evening.  The room is plainly but neatly appointed and furnished.

 

 

Book 4

At the Window with Binoculars

Standing at her kitchen window, Domenica Macdonald, cultural anthropologist, denizen of Scotland Street, citizen of Edinburgh, lowered the binoculars that for the last fifteen minutes she had trained on the street below.

 

Book 5

This is what happened in Faha over the Christmas of 1962, in what became known in the parish as the time of the child. 

 

Book 6

The Door to Hell

I am lost. The flames in the crater have erased the stars and then drained all the shadows of light.

 

 

The titles and authors revealed:

 

 

Book 1

A New Lease on Death (The Ruby and Cordelia Mysteries #1)

By Olivia Blacke

325 pages • first pub 2024 

fiction fantasy mystery

Recommended through Mel W’s blog

 

The premise is that one of the detectives has already met her demise.  !  I enjoyed the characters and the setting.  Sometimes the prose was a bit repetitive.  Ends on a big reveal which will obviously require the reading of the next book to resolve.  And that is somewhat annoying, but I would like to read it.

 

Book 2

Separation of Church and Hate: A Sane Person's Guide to Taking Back the Bible from Fundamentalists, Fascists, and Flock-Fleecing Frauds

John Fugelsang

304 pages • first pub 2025

nonfiction politics religion 

Instructive, amusing in parts, and infuriating in others.  I was astonished to hear the Catholic Church’s actual practice on birth control in one place described.  I was already aware of many of the theological interpretations of the Bible verses, but I still found it interesting.  And we all know there is plenty of patriarchy to be found in both fundamentalism and fascism.

 

 

Book 3

An Enemy of the People - the play by Henrik Ibsen

164 pages • first pub 1882.   

Although this play was written in 1882, the issues treated are relevant today.  It was an easy read, and was available to buy for Kindle for very little $ being passed on to J.B., the King of Amazon*.  I read it for book club, and then we are going to see an interpretation of the play next month.  

Themes: environment, male hubris, crowd mentality, economics, family dynamics, reasons for compromising one’s values, the price to pay for not compromising one’s values.

 

Book 4

A Promise of Ankles: (44 Scotland Street #14)

By Alexander McCall Smith

320 pages • first pub 2020

fiction contemporary

I could only get this book from the library on audio.  Curses on my need to read series in order!  I managed to finish, but it was a struggle.  I liked the narrator's voice, and judging by his name, Robert Ian Mackenzie, he seems the perfect choice to narrate a book that is set in Scotland.  I have no idea if he is Scottish.

Includes some amusing plot developments about a human skull and, separately, language dominance.

Re patriarchy:  McCall Smith’s characters often express views about how they feel females or males should live.  It’s maybe not patriarchy per se, but I can’t remember any instance where the characters in the Scotland Street series show wide variance from what I will call traditional societal gender norms.  However, to me, there is an overall feeling of acceptance of others’ differences in his books.  It’s just that the differences portrayed are not too far from “center”.

 

 

Book 5

Time of the Child By Niall Williams

304 pages • first pub 2024

fiction literary

Recommended by Stephen Colbert and S. K.

A story ultimately of hope, in a slow but enjoyable read.  It takes place at Christmas-time in a small town in Ireland in 1962. The characters are quite appealing.  Loads of mentions of tea, but often it’s an offer of tea, only to be refused.  The patriarchy is inherent in the setting (a small Catholic town in 1962); the plot ultimately pushes gently against that patriarchy. 

The prose varies from delicious to a bit convoluted, but it’s mostly lovely.  I recommend it, but it’s best to read during a long snowy winter, with a cup of hot tea at hand and the news turned off.

 

Book 6

Sovietistan - a travel diary of going through former Soviet Republics.  

By Erika Fatland with Kari Dickson (Translator)

470 pages • first pub 2014 

nonfiction history travel

“A good mix of humor and despotism” – Older Daughter

A fascinating description of the Norwegian author’s travels through the five Central Asian countries that used to be part of Russia/ Soviet Union.  Recommend, but best perhaps to read in periodic doses.

This book was highly recommended to me in 2023 by Older Daughter, who read it as part of her project to read books by continent.  I supposedly studied the Soviet Union in grad school, but learned next to nothing about the Central Asian SSRs (I am pretty sure this is my fault, not the school’s fault).  I started reading Sovietistan, gave up, bought the kindle version about 6 months ago*, then stopped again because of other reading assignments (book clubs) and despair at my own country’s descent toward autocracy.  

To encourage me to resume, she said that I should keep reading it because the book is “a good mix of humor and despotism”.  Which it is.  This book works well to read in chunks, with a section for each of the five countries.

That is the same daughter who in December exclaimed enthusiastically, “I finished the dictator book!”  

Me:  “THE dictator book?!”

Older Daughter: “There is a whole genre of books from Central America called the “dictator” genre. The title of the book I read is called I, the Supreme. Or in Spanish, Yo, El Supremo.  From the country of Paraguay.”

I will not be reading Yo, El Supremo anytime soon, but it could be fun to shout that phrase.

While reading Sovietistan I could read about the dictatorships without looking away – at their core, autocrats are ridiculous.  They insist on being called El Supremo. From afar, their narcissism is amusingly appalling.  But for some reason I balked at reading about girls/young women who were kidnapped and forced to marry the man who kidnapped them, often with the permission of the girl’s parents.  I skimmed those sections.  Patriarchy is prominent in these Central Asian countries.  (And, it seems now, plenty of other places too.)  

This book enlightened me on how those former Soviet republics have fared since the dissolution of the USSR.  I did not fact-check the history as presented in the book.  It should be no surprise that there is plenty of environmental disaster.

There is some description of the changing demographics of the countries. Since publication, there have been some changes in leadership for some of the countries.  

- - - - - - - - 

* I despise any of my money going to Amazon but I simply must continue to read, which is easier for me on my kindle.  If I can’t get the kindle version through my library, I might buy it.  Reading helps fight the patriarchy.  In my opinion.

A Convergence of Holy Days

The brisket is roasted and stored in the fridge.  Two Passover desserts are safely tucked in the freezer.  The Apple Matzo Kugel, required according to the family halachah, is ready.  We have enough matzo to last to mid-May.  There is ample cream cheese, hummus, and peanut butter to spread on it.

In other words, the larder is pleasantly stocked but there has been nothing to eat for dinner this week.  Just like the week before Thanksgiving.

It occurred to me that we could have a reverse seder plate this year.  Put a whole bunch of different foods on the seder plate.  During the seder meal, we would remove each food from the seder plate and eject it from the house while explaining why it does not belong.  That seems to be the direction America is headed, pointing out those who do not belong here.

It's not unheard of to desire to throw things
off the seder plate:
"A woman belongs on the bima like an orange
belongs on the seder plate,"
said some dude who was threatened by women.

Tomorrow night is Good Friday, with solemn worship commemorating the crucifixion of Jesus.  It is also the first night of Passover, with a festive meal commemorating the exodus from Egypt.  This is not the first time that these two, both of which the Common Household observes, have coincided.

In the past, the Common Household seder
has included telling the Passover story
using Peeps.

I think the clump of purple Peeps are Israelites
leaving Egypt.

You can tell this Peep is Moses.  He has a staff.

I was today years old when I discovered that the first night of Passover, the “First Seder,” never falls on a Sunday, Tuesday, or Thursday.  Minimal research on the internet leads me to conclude that this is thanks to Maimonides, the medieval Jewish scholar.  

I first learned about Maimonides through my children, as is the case with many things I have learned.  When my son was a mere youth, his second-grade religious school class was studying Maimonides.  I asked him “What are the eight levels of tzedakah, according to Maimonides?”  He replied, “Level 1, level 2, level 3, level 4, level 5, level 6, level 7, level 8.”   

He always replied to any question with the most concise answer.

Maimonides’ numbered list of eight levels of charitable giving has to do with the amount of cheerfulness exhibited while giving, the swiftness of giving, and how much recognition can be conferred upon the giver.

Maimonides set up the Jewish calendar so that Passover never begins on the night of Sunday, Tuesday, or Thursday.  It seems Maimonides was most concerned about Yom Kippur not starting on a Thursday night, and the result of that rule guides the weekdays on which Passover can start.  If Yom Kippur would start on a Thursday night, then it would immediately precede Shabbat (which starts on Friday night).  That would be two solid days of numerous prohibitions against doing various things.

I haven’t looked up the dates of the First Seder back to Maimonides time in the 12th century, but did look back at the years of my marriage to see how many times the First Seder fell on a Friday night.  For the past 33 years, the First Seder has fallen on a Friday night 10 times (30%), but one of those Fridays was not Good Friday.   There was a stretch, from 1999 to 2011, when the First Seder never fell on a Friday, thus lulling me into complacency.  From 2012 to 2022, though, 5 of the 11 First Seders fell on Good Friday.  In 2016 the First Seder fell on a Friday, but that was one of those rare years when Holy Week was widely separated from Passover, due to the intricacies of the lunar and solar calendars.  The next time when the First Seder will coincide with Good Friday is in 2029, seven years from now, if we make it that far.

Having just read the account of the crucifixion in the Gospel of John, I am aware of how unjust and painful an event it was.  And yet there is redemption at its core.  We will be commemorating Good Friday at church tomorrow evening with traditional readings and music.  The exodus from Egypt was also an event of injustice,  pain and redemption.  The firstborn of the Egyptians died.  The Israelites had to leave their homes in a hurry and trek to a place unknown to them.  We will be celebrating that uncertain freedom at home the next night with traditional readings, food, and music.

There is much pain and injustice in the world.  I hope to spend these paradoxically joint holy days praying for redemption and peace.  God knows, the world needs both.

This is a giant painting of the burial of Jesus,
at the Church of the Sepulchre in
Jerusalem.  The holy sites are right on top
of one another, just as these two holy days are this year.

The Gospel of John, Chapter 8: To Throw the Stone

 

The Gospel of John, Chapter 8  - To Throw the Stone

Read Chapter 8 here.

Jesus says some extremely provocative things in this chapter, and it’s a long chapter.  Basically it’s a big argument between Jesus and the Jewish authorities.

The first 11 verses of this chapter are in brackets, because some ancient manuscripts of the Bible don’t include it.  This section is often called “The Woman Caught in Adultery” but The Message more appropriately calls it “To Throw the Stone”, which puts the emphasis where it should be.

It’s the morning after the events of Chapter 7.  Jesus apparently spent overnight at the Mount of Olives, but returns to the temple the next day, and does some teaching.  The scribes and Pharisees want to trick Jesus so that they can arrest him.  They bring before Jesus a woman who was caught committing adultery, and try to get Jesus to contradict what the law says her punishment should be - death by stoning.  Jesus ignores them, doodling in the dirt while they prattle on. Finally, Jesus famously says, “Let anyone among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.”  Gotcha!  Now if one of ‘em throws a stone at the woman, it’s the equivalent of claiming “I’m sinless!”  The scribes and Pharisees all slink away.

Remember who is entitled to throw the first stone, O Best Beloved.

Jesus tells the woman that he hasn’t condemned her, and neither has anyone else.  He advises her to go on her way, and to not sin again.  So it’s not that the woman did no wrong.  It’s that she is not going to be accused or have to bear punishment.  (verse 11)

And now, another of the “I am” statements of this gospel:

12 Again Jesus spoke to them, saying, “I am the light of the world.  Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness but will have the light of life.”

A beautiful statement, referring to the creation story and the poem at the start of this gospel:

John 1:4-5 In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.

The Pharisees question Jesus’ authority to say such a bold thing.  He says that his testimony comes from “the Father who sent me” and further accuses the Pharisees of not knowing God.

Jesus tells the Pharisees, “I am going away” which is a euphemism for death.  Jesus says “You are from below, I am from above; you are of this world, I am not of this world.” (verse 21)  More provocatively, he tells them in verse 24 that  “you will die in your sins unless you believe that I am he.”

He who?  The Pharisees understandably ask “Who are you?”  Ah, that’s the crux of it.  So far Jesus has said, “I am the light of the world… I judge no one…” (and immediately contradicting himself) “my judgment is valid.”  He’s like the guy in the beer commercial:  I judge no one, but if I do, I judge not alone but with the Father who sent me.  

However, I don’t think the Pharisees are asking that question with genuine curiosity.  This gospel has already said that the authorities are looking to trip up Jesus so they can arrest him and kill him.

But in response to their question Jesus responds with a snippy “Why do I speak to you at all?”   Eventually he says “When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will realize that I am he…”   “The Son of Man” is most likely another term for “Messiah” - the anointed one.

Some of the Jews hear what he is saying and believe in him. Remember that from Chapter 6 we could interpret “believe in him” to mean that these people decided to align with Jesus, to be loyal to Jesus.  They decided to “belove God and all that God beloves.”  Jesus says (verse 31):  

“If you continue in my word, you are truly my disciples; and you will know the truth and the truth will make you free.”

The text doesn’t explain what he means by “continue in my word.” The CEV translation says “If you keep on obeying what I have said, you are truly my disciples.”  As far as I can tell, what Jesus has said is: Believe in me.  I am from God. Follow me.  Come to me.

The new believers don’t ask what “continue in my word” means. Instead, they object that they have never been slaves.  They are Jews, so they say “we are descendants of Abraham.”  Jesus replies, well, you kinda have been slaves because  “everyone who commits sin is a slave to sin” (verse 34).  Remember, O Best Beloved, who can throw the first stone, from verses 8:1-11.   Jesus says to them, “Because I tell the truth, you do not believe me.  Which of you convicts me of sin?” (verse 45-46).  He is supposedly talking to the new believers but Jesus does not view them as believers in him; in his view they have not aligned with him.

The whole exchange descends into a horrible argument.  This section could easily be used for anti-Jewish purposes.  Jesus says to them, you are trying to kill me, and you don’t know God.  In fact, you are children of the devil.  Accusatory words!

Not surprisingly, they try to stone him, but he hides and escapes.

So this gospel’s antagonism between the Jews and Jesus continues.  The emphasis on belief in Jesus continues.  But we have received a gem of wisdom: no person is entitled to throw the first stone to punish another’s sin.  That’s what Jesus said, but just try and find anybody who lives by that maxim these days.

Metaphors: the light of the world, darkness, slavery.

Images and themes: no one is without sin, Jesus offers light and life, the authority of Jesus’ testimony, the

blindness of the Jews (the portrayal seems horribly antisemitic to me).

People/Beings:   Jesus, the people, scribes and Pharisees, a woman caught in adultery,

“The Jews”

Places: in Jerusalem: on a spot of dirt at the temple, then in the temple “Treasury” 

The Gospel of John, Chapter 6:22-71: Belief = Belove

The Gospel of John, Chapter 6:22-71

Read Chapter 6 here

Is it a bit comical that the crowd now traipses off to follow Jesus again?  My! people come and go so quickly here!

I struggled with this part of Chapter 6.  It includes most of what I haven’t liked about this gospel. 

1) continued use of broad metaphors. 

2) continual emphasis on believing in Jesus.

3) continued use of the pejorative “The Jews”

The great parts

1) lots of traipsing about on boats (and also, some walking on water)

2) The famous words “I am the bread of life.”

Metaphor

This gospel, perhaps more than other parts of the Bible, is extremely metaphor heavy.  Having gotten this far in this gospel I am astonished that anyone could read the Bible and say that it all must be taken literally.  There is almost nothing that Jesus has preached on so far in this gospel that is not related to a spiritual metaphor.  I am viewing this gospel as “permission granted” to read any part of the Bible as metaphor or allegory, just as the ancient Christian scholars did.

Belief

To modern ears, the word “belief” / “believe in” seems to mean “I am going along with a certain set of axioms about life.”  In practical terms, belief could be inconsequential.  The crowd asks Jesus “What must we do to perform the works of God?” and Jesus said, “Believe in him whom he has sent.”  The way we define belief, it doesn’t involve any work at all. Belief seems to us to be the thoughts that churn around in our minds and that come out of our mouths, not what we do.  

Diana Butler Bass recently wrote about this, in her essay “I Believe Ted Lasso and Marcus Borg.”  I don’t know what yinz think about Marcus Borg, but this quote in Butler Bass’s article speaks to me:

Prior to the seventeenth century, the word “believe” did not mean believing in the truth of statements or propositions, whether problematic or not. Grammatically, the object of believing was not statements, but a person. Moreover, the contexts in which it is used in premodern English make it clear that it meant: to hold dear; to prize; to give one’s loyalty to; to give one’s self to; to commit oneself. It meant. . . faithfulness, allegiance, loyalty, commitment, and trust.

Most simply, “to believe” meant “to love”.  Indeed the English words “believe”and “belove” are related.  What we believe is what we belove.  Faith is about beloving God…. To believe in God is to belove God.  Faith is about beloving God and all that God beloves.  Faith is the way of the heart.

The Message translation prefers to translate Jesus’ admonishments to “believe in me” as “align with me”.  Or ‘be loyal to me”.   That makes more sense to me.  Going forward in my reading of this gospel, I will try to substitute “belove God and all that God beloves” when it talks about believing in Jesus.

The Jews

The author’s use of “The Jews” as the term for Jesus’ enemies still seems anti-Jewish to me.  I have not seen anything so far to dissuade me from my view.

The Boats

For all the high and lofty speechifying Jesus does, for all his speaking of himself obliquely, for all the annoyances of the anti-Jewish language, there is the story.  Just picture it - these people are so taken with what Jesus is saying that they are continually chasing after him in boats.  Across the sea one way, and then back.  Jesus is constantly on the move.

The Bread

Jesus said:

“I am the bread of life.  Whoever comes to me will never be hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty.”  - John 6:35

Throughout the centuries, these have been comforting words to believers.

* * * * * 

My description of the story, for those who want more

The Gospel of John, Chapter 6:22-71

In the previous verse, the disciples and Jesus had escaped the crowd during the night, by crossing the Sea of Galilee back to Capernaum.  Now it’s the next day and the crowd, finding Jesus missing, commandeers some boats, setting off for Capernaum to look for Jesus. 

The crowd finds Jesus, who says to them, you are only looking for me because I fed you.  Jesus again talks about food as a metaphor for eternal life.  The crowd asks “What must we do to perform the works of God?” 

Jesus replies, “This is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent.”  Or maybe you prefer The Message:  Jesus said, “Sign on with the One that God has sent.  That kind of a commitment gets you in on God’s works.”

The crowd asks for a sign, so that they can believe him. Oy, even though he had just done the gigantic sign of feeding them all, using just a few loaves of bread & some sardines.  Maybe they are just trying to get some breakfast sandwiches out of him.  

The crowd, who know their Bible stories, remind Jesus that their ancestors “ate the manna in the wilderness; as it is written, ‘He gave them bread from heaven to eat.’”  Jesus replies, “It is my Father who gives you the true bread from heaven.  For the bread of God is that which comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.”

Now, reminiscent of Jesus’ speech to the woman at the well in Chapter 4, Jesus makes this famous statement:

“I am the bread of life.  Whoever comes to me will never be hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty.”  - John 6:35

This is one of the “I am” statements featured in this gospel.  It is perhaps meant to recall the moment when Moses asks God what God’s name is, and God says to Moses “I am who I am.”  (Exodus 3:14)  

In the next verse, Jesus gives a fair assessment of the crowd:  “But I said to you that you have seen me and yet do not believe.”  

Jesus then makes a speech that eventually ends up with: believe in me so you may have eternal life.

Jesus’ speech in verses 37-40 is one that confounds me, as is often the case in the Gospel of John. It uses small, easy words, but is hard to add up.  Here it is in the NRSV:

37 Everything that the Father gives me will come to me, and anyone who comes to me I will never drive away;  38 for I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me. 39 And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day.  40 This is indeed the will of my Father, that all who see the Son and believe in him may have eternal life; and I will raise them up on the last day.”

I find it easier to understand The Message interpretation:

“…Every person the Father gives me eventually comes running to me. And once that person is with me, I hold on and don’t let go. I came down from heaven not to follow my own agenda but to accomplish the will of the One who sent me.

39-40 “This, in a nutshell, is that will: that everything handed over to me by the Father be completed—not a single detail missed—and at the wrap-up of time I have everything and everyone put together, upright and whole. This is what my Father wants: that anyone who sees the Son and trusts who he is and what he does and then aligns with him will enter real life, eternal life. My part is to put them on their feet alive and whole at the completion of time.”

Okay, so Jesus essentially calls himself the bread of heaven, equating himself with God.  Guess who doesn’t like that?

Enter “The Jews” - the Bad Guys Of The Gospel of John.  (Let’s remember that Jesus, the disciples, and probably most of the crowds are Jews.  But this is not what the author means by “The Jews”.)  “The Jews” say that Jesus is just a regular guy, the son of Joseph; how can he say he has come down from heaven?  Jesus repeats the speech he gave to the crowd.  Jesus offers himself as the living bread: “the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.”

Some of the verses seem to support the Calvinist notion of “the elect” - God picks you, not the other way around.

Verse 44:  “No one can come to me unless drawn by the Father who sent me.”

“The Jews” take it literally, but Jesus is speaking metaphorically.  Jesus takes it a step further, saying provocatively, “Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood you have no life in you. Those who eat my flesh and drink my blood have eternal life, and I will raise them up on the last day;.... Those who eat my flesh and drink my blood abide in me, and I in them. Just as the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so whoever eats me will live because of me.”  (verses 6:53-57)

I take this passage as permission to interpret the Bible (any part of it) as metaphor, as allegory, as poetry.  Interpreted literally, this passage is just glorifying cannibalism, and completely misses the point. Already in the previous chapters, Jesus has taken to task those who blindly interpret what he says literally.

Four times, Jesus has said ‘eat my flesh; drink my blood.’  It’s like he’s rubbing their face in it.   The disciples even have trouble with this blunt statement equating Jesus with the bread of heaven.  Some of them give up being his disciples.  But the twelve main disciples say they are sticking with Jesus.  Jesus says, I chose the twelve of  you, but one is a devil.  This is foreshadowing - he is talking about Judas.

The top ten most frequent words in Chapter 6:22-71 are (in order)
bread, Jesus, life, come, Father, one, heaven, give, believe, and eat.

Whew.  That was long.

Metaphors:   bread, flesh, blood

Images and themes: bread of heaven = bread of life

People/Beings:   the crowd, Jesus, “The Jews”, the disciples, Judas.

Places: Sea of Galilee, boats, the synagogue at Capernaum