<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">

    <title type="text">Eighth Day Books Discussions</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://forums.edbforums.com/" />
    <link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://forums.edbforums.com/atom/" />
    <updated>2008-08-20T04:44:17Z</updated>
    <rights>Copyright (c) 2008</rights>
    <generator uri="http://www.pmachine.com/" version="1.4.2">ExpressionEngine</generator>
    <id>tag:forums.edbforums.com,2008:01:19</id>


    <entry>
      <title>The balm of Gilead</title>
      <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://forums.edbforums.com/viewthread/28/" />      
      <id>tag:forums.edbforums.com,2006:/viewthread/.28</id>
      <published>2006-07-12T14:40:51Z</published>
      <updated>2008-08-20T04:44:17Z</updated>
      <author><name>Jennifer</name></author>
      <content type="html">
      <![CDATA[
        <p>In Hebrew, Gilead means &#8220;hill of testimony&#8221; or &#8220;mound of witness.&#8221; It&#8217;s where King David fled from Absolom and the homeplace of the prophet Elijah, located near the Jordan river. 
</p>
<p>
The &#8220;Balm of Gilead&#8221; refers to a healing compound made from the resin of a bush that grows in the region. Old Testament references include (Jeremiah 46:11) &#8220;Go up into Gilead, and take balm, O virgin, the daughter of Egypt...&#8221; and (also from the weeping prophet) &#8220;Is there no balm in Gilead; is there no physician there? Why then is not the health of the daughter of my people recovered?&#8221; The well-known spiritual infers both the Holy Spirit and Jesus as the Balm of Gilead, and Edgar Allan Poe makes reference to the phrase in “The Raven,” in which the character believes the balm of Gilead can heal his broken heart. 
</p>
<p>
What is the balm of Robinson&#8217;s <i>Gilead</i>? Do you think the title is ironic or symbolic or something else entirely? How does Robinson flesh this out?
</p>
      ]]>
      </content>
    </entry>

    <entry>
      <title>The Narrator Question</title>
      <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://forums.edbforums.com/viewthread/26/" />      
      <id>tag:forums.edbforums.com,2006:/viewthread/.26</id>
      <published>2006-06-27T05:54:58Z</published>
      <updated>2008-08-20T09:20:46Z</updated>
      <author><name>john</name></author>
      <content type="html">
      <![CDATA[
        <p>Upon starting <i>Gilead</i>, one is (or at least I was) immediately struck with the dilemma of what to make of a novel told almost entirely monologically, with a single voice.&nbsp; John Ames very rarely even quotes another&#8217;s words, so we are left (or given) to see and hear all aspects of the story and its characters through his perception alone.&nbsp; Given the rhetorical situation of its writing (a letter to his young son) this on one hand seems fine, a fulfillment of his desire to communicate to a child with whom he&#8217;ll never have an adult relationship.&nbsp; But I&#8217;m wondering where this leaves the rest of us (we might wonder, too, where it will leave him), who are overhearing this letter, and what this means for the novel.&nbsp; There is the likeability issue, but more importantly what are the consequences (for good or ill) of having so much filtered through John Ames?&nbsp; Does the lack of another point of view even give us an opportunity to know him well enough to judge?
</p>
<p>
This might be another version of your high school English teacher&#8217;s question (probably about Nick in <i>The Great Gatsby</i>) about reliable narrators.
</p>
      ]]>
      </content>
    </entry>


</feed>