August Meeting, "Chango's Beads and Two-Toned Shoes" by William Kennedy

Skipping back in time to August, we met to discuss Chango's Beads and Two-Toned Shoes. Although half of the story takes place in Cuba, the closest we could get to Latin cuisine was Loma Linda, an authentic Mexican restaurant that was quite good, and the Happy Hour Margaritas were even better! Karen, our newest member, hosted the group at her apartment, also providing some fabulous deserts to get us through the evening. And we did need help!

First up, we made our book selections for the coming year. As is our custom, everyone suggests two books then we pare it down to one per person. It was a tough job this time around for some reason. There were quite a few non-fiction books, we have read in the past but with mixed success. It seemed to take us a very long time to make any decisions, lots of seesawing back and forth on final choices. In the end, we picked three non-fiction books, an all-time high for this group. We'll see how that goes.

Then, on to the book. It sounded like a great story: Fidel Castro's rise to power in Cuba and Robert Kennedy's assassination. Although the historical stuff was interesting, it assumed a level of knowledge that most of us didn't have. It's not that we're an uninformed group; several members are well-read librarians and others are PhD-level researchers. The author forgot about his readers, wanting to show off his knowledge of major historical figures and places. 

The feeling with this history/sociology lesson is that we're supposed to get the parallels between the murders of Cuban rebels and the race riots of the 1960s, but the message gets lost in the way it's presented: too many characters but not enough character development; long, philosophical conversations with no real purpose; too much jumping around in time with inadequate context; implausible connections and interactions between all of the characters across decades; clichéd  passages where everything gets explained (Quinn's motivation to follow in his grandfather's footsteps; the jazz musician using his music to "fit in"); clichéd characters (maverick report; overly-sexualized heroine; ghetto priest; hooker with a heart of gold; senile father who gets the girl; gullible Korean war vet); and so on. 

Why this book was chosen as one of the 100 Notable Books of The New York Times Review in 2011. Because Kennedy is an already-famous author? Because everything he writes must be treated with reverence? Because of the historical significance of the subject matter? For my response to my rhetorical question, check out the second essay on the "Opinions and Rants" tab, entitled "Books That Win Awards and Shouldn't." Although I wrote it a few years ago, I think it applies very well in the case of William Kennedy's latest contribution.