Bad history:
Joseph McCarthy didn’t do any investigation of Russian expatriates living in New York City that I know of, and he certainly didn’t have the power to shut down a concert pianist’s career and send her into hiding in the backwoods of Minnesota. I’m tired of books that use Joseph McCarthy as a bogie man and arch-villain. He was an idiot, and the Senate eventually got tired of him and censured him. The Communism he feared was very real and dangerous. The nineteen fifties were characterized by anti-Communism, but I doubt very seriously that many people, much less an entire small town, were spending their gossip time finding Communists under the bed, so to speak. They would have been much more concerned about a “foreigner” who didn’t use her purported husband’s last name and may not have been married to him at all, living in the same house with him. Oh, and girls didn’t wear overalls to school in the sixties where I grew up; it was against the rules. You also didn’t call adults by their first names, especially not parents. Franny and Sandy commit both of these social errors, making them as characters feel slightly anachronistic while set among all the very period Communist hunters. Maybe Minnesota was more progressive when it came to clothing and parental respect and more reactionary when it came to politics than West Texas was.
Bad hermenuetics:
“The good book tells us many things,” the mayor reverend exclaimed, and opened his Bible. He read out loud: “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast.”
“What’s that supposed to mean?” called out old Hans Zimmerman. “I don’t understand a word you jest said.”
“This is what it means, Hans,” thundered Mayor Reverend Jerry, looking right at the Orilees. “It means that the only way to get to heaven is through good deeds. You can’t bribe God, the holy judge of us all. And those of us who think they can are in for a real rude surprise. . .”
I don’t think the author meant to make Mayor Reverend Jerry into a preacher who contradicts his own chosen text, but that’s obviously what happened. Old Hans Zimmerman wasn’t the only one who didn’t understand a word of the verses that the preacher was misinterpreting to make his point. I just don’t see how you get “good deeds get you to heaven” out of “not of works, lest any man should boast.”
Bad writing:
Within a few paragraphs the author tells me that Runty Knutson is the “class troublemaker;” Gretchen Beasley is the “class crybaby;” and Mr. Moody, the principal, “hated kids.” Show, don’t tell. Actually, we get examples of Rusty’s trouble-making, Gretchen’s crying, and Mr. Moody’s hatred for kids. So why do we need the labels?
The characters are unbelievable and cartoonish. Madame Malenkov, with her long black hair and Russian accent, reminds me of Natasha Fatale ( Rocky and Bullwinkle) Franny and her friend Sandy Anne are the Katzenjammer Kids or maybe the Little Rascals. Nancy “Prancy” Orilee, Franny’s and Sandy’s arch-enemy, is Nellie Oleson from Little House on the Prairie (the TV series, not the book). And it all reads like a bad TV sitcom with a suitably unbelievable ending.
The problem with writing a critical review of a book is that I feel as if I’m implying that I could have done a better job of writing the book myself. However, I know I couldn’t. I’m also fairly sure the author could have written a much better story. There are scenes that would have been worth the reading time, especially those in which Franny and Sandy spy on the suspected Commie spy and the scenes involving Franny and Madame Malenkov. As is, it’s a case of might-have-been-maybe-next-time.
In the “Don’t take my word for it” department here are some opposing views from other bloggers:
Miss Erin loved it, and in fact she nominated it for the Cybil Award for Middle School Fiction.
Annie at Crazy for Kids Books liked it, too: “It is well written and the author does a good job of moving the story forward while revealing the strengths and foibles of the town’s inhabitants. The conclusion is quite satisfying as justice and understanding prevail.”
And then there’s Becky:“I loved, loved, loved The Rising Star of Rusty Nail.”
Chris Shanley-Dillman at KidsReads is in agreement with the others: “Lesley M. M. Blume sweeps readers back to another time with her newest book — back to a time when a school principal chain-smokes in his office and everyone fears bombing attacks from the Russians.”
And it got a starred review in Booklist. It does look as if I’m in the minority.
But I’m willing to “hang” with the minority opinion! Ok, so perhaps I should read it myself? I don’t know. You rather convinced me its not worth my time by satisfying us all that you were open to the fact that other people did indeed like the book. That’s a great idea. Very reasonable.
Thanks for the review and the examples you gave as to why you did not like the book!
you know, sherry — this book is under the ‘fiction’ category. all of the history isn’t supposed to be exact. lots of poeple use real charactesr in fictional capacities. so what if mccarthy didn’t investigate musicians in nyc. he investigated artists all across american, especially in hollywood, and this book gives a window into a scary time in american history. many of the kids who read it will become acquainted with mccarthy for the first time – in addition to other figures mentioned in the book. you’ve missed the point.
the writing in RUSTY NAIL is excellent. it’s been shortlisted on several mock newbery lists. scholastic features it in its bookfairs. it was given universally positive reviews by readers and the press.
and yes, we are all waiting for you to write a ‘better’ book. we’ll be waiting to opine on whether you really are a good judge of good writing then.
– penelope williamson
and other admirers of lesely blume’s writing!!
According to Wikipedia: “McCarthy is often incorrectly described as part of the House Committee on Un-American Activities (technically HCUA, but generally known as HUAC). HUAC is best known for the investigation of Alger Hiss and for its investigation of the Hollywood film industry, which led to the blacklisting of hundreds of actors, writers and directors. HUAC was a House committee, and as such had no connection with McCarthy, who served in the Senate.”
Yes, the book is fiction, but authors of historical fiction have a responsibility to get their history right. McCarthy was concerned aout Communist infiltration into the US government and the army, not the entertainment industry, and certainly not concert pianists in NYC. If I wrote a fiction book and made my main character a Navaho who is imprisoned in a Nazi concentration camp, I could fairly be accused of distorting history, and the classification for the book might tip over into the fantasy realm. Possible, but highly unlikely.
Penelope, you say that many kids who read Rusty Nail will become familiar with McCarthy and his crusade for the first time. Shouldn’t they become familiar with the real history of what he did or didn’t do instead of having him becoming a symbol of what was wrong with the fifties and a stand-in for others (HUAC) who did things with which he is falsely associated?
As for my other criticisms, I stand by them, too.
“If I wrote a fiction book and made my main character a Navaho who is imprisoned in a Nazi concentration camp, I could fairly be accused of distorting history, and the classification for the book might tip over into the fantasy realm.”
Hardly a relevant comparison.
Btw, Navaho is really spelled “Navajo”.
Pingback: Read Togethers: Cybil Nominees Paired and Grouped by Topics and Themes at Semicolon