The Poisonwood Bible is a story told by the wife and four daughters of Nathan Price, a fierce, evangelical Baptist who takes his family and mission to the Belgian Congo in 1959. They carry with them everything they believe they will need from home, but soon find that all of it -- from garden seeds to Scripture -- is calamitously transformed on African soil. What follows is a suspenseful epic of one family's tragic undoing and remarkable reconstruction over the course of three decades in postcolonial Africa.
This P.S. edition features an extra 16 pages of insights into the book, including author interviews, recommended reading, and more.
Amazon.com: Oprah Book Club® Selection, June 2000: As any reader of The Mosquito Coast knows, men who drag their families to far-off climes in pursuit of an Idea seldom come to any good, while those familiar with At Play in the Fields of the Lord or Kalimantaan understand that the minute a missionary sets foot on the fictional stage, all hell is about to break loose. So when Barbara Kingsolver sends missionary Nathan Price along with his wife and four daughters off to Africa in The Poisonwood Bible, you can be sure that salvation is the one thing they're not likely to find. The year is 1959 and the place is the Belgian Congo. Nathan, a Baptist preacher, has come to spread the Word in a remote village reachable only by airplane. To say that he and his family are woefully unprepared would be an understatement: "We came from Bethlehem, Georgia, bearing Betty Crocker cake mixes into the jungle," says Leah, one of Nathan's daughters. But of course it isn't long before they discover that the tremendous humidity has rendered the mixes unusable, their clothes are unsuitable, and they've arrived in the middle of political upheaval as the Congolese seek to wrest independence from Belgium. In addition to poisonous snakes, dangerous animals, and the hostility of the villagers to Nathan's fiery take-no-prisoners brand of Christianity, there are also rebels in the jungle and the threat of war in the air. Could things get any worse?
In fact they can and they do. The first part of The Poisonwood Bible revolves around Nathan's intransigent, bullying personality and his effect on both his family and the village they have come to. As political instability grows in the Congo, so does the local witch doctor's animus toward the Prices, and both seem to converge with tragic consequences about halfway through the novel. From that point on, the family is dispersed and the novel follows each member's fortune across a span of more than 30 years.
The Poisonwood Bible is arguably Barbara Kingsolver's most ambitious work, and it reveals both her great strengths and her weaknesses. As Nathan Price's wife and daughters tell their stories in alternating chapters, Kingsolver does a good job of differentiating the voices. But at times they can grate--teenage Rachel's tendency towards precious malapropisms is particularly annoying (students practice their "French congregations"; Nathan's refusal to take his family home is a "tapestry of justice"). More problematic is Kingsolver's tendency to wear her politics on her sleeve; this is particularly evident in the second half of the novel, in which she uses her characters as mouthpieces to explicate the complicated and tragic history of the Belgian Congo.
Despite these weaknesses, Kingsolver's fully realized, three-dimensional characters make The Poisonwood Bible compelling, especially in the first half, when Nathan Price is still at the center of the action. And in her treatment of Africa and the Africans she is at her best, exhibiting the acute perception, moral engagement, and lyrical prose that have made her previous novels so successful. --Alix Wilber
Subtle Strife: The Pantheistic Doctrine of The Poisonwood Bible Note: This is written as an introduction/review of TPB to senior AP English students. You've probably learned, after a year of AP English 11 and now a few months of AP English 12: Authors do not simply write to convey the plotline of a story, but rather deeper ideas. What may not be emphasized as much is this: Authors are people, like the rest of us, with their own biases and beliefs. They may or may not construct an accurate portrayal of the world. They often convey their sentiments through the stories they write. Perhaps you've picked up on this in the past books you've read. George Orwell was anti-communist. Kate Chopin was feminist. These authors, along with other authors that you read, reveal their beliefs through the content of their work. Barbara Kingsolver is no different. What is different about TPB is that it is perhaps the most religiously dogmatic novel I have read. On the surface, The Poisonwood Bible is just a story about one American family who moved to Africa, but after reading it, it has become apparent that it was incredibly hostile to monotheism in general and Christianity in particular. Perhaps one of the greatest indicators of where an author stands is how he or she develops the characters. Soon you'll meet the beastly, raving buffoon of a man named Nathan Price, who is sadly the man Kingsolver chooses to represent biblical Christianity in her novel. Nathan is a preacher who drags his family to Africa on an ill-fated mission trip. You might notice, as you read Poisonwood, that Nathan is in Africa seeking his own glory and trying to change the political system of the Africans. This is quite contrary and insulting, in this writer's eyes, to the actual missionaries who make great personal sacrifice and have genuine concern for the spiritual and physical well-being of the people they go to.
Nathan's understanding of the Bible seems incredibly poor. Numerous examples of his lack of grasp on the Scriptures could be stated, but I'll give one example from early in the book that particularly stuck with me. He sees bare-breasted African women, and goes into a rant about Sodom and Gomorrah. He seems to imply that the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah was "nakedness," and he seems to accuse the Africans of the same sin on that basis. In reality, the entire city of Sodom was basically a haven for homosexual orgies and probably other disgusting sexual practices as well. They not only participated in this sin, but celebrated it. I won't detail it here, but you can read the account in Genesis 19. There are probably too many pseudo-Biblical ideas portrayed as Biblical in TPB to go through in detail. Among these ideas are that the "Curse of Ham" led to dark skin and that sex between husband and wife is sinful. Of course, neither of these ideas are true; other nonsense unbiblical ideas are likewise portrayed as biblical in Kingsolver's book, adding to the already-extensive attack on Christianity present in the book. One theme you might discuss in this class is Eastern vs. Western culture. Constantly, Kingsolver seems to equate spreading the gospel of Jesus Christ with spreading Western culture, democracy, etc. Notice, as you read, how anything that Nathan attempts utterly fails. When he attempts agriculture the "American way," it utterly fails in Africa. When he tries to introduce democracy to the tribe, it brings problems and resentment. When he tries to bring the gospel of Jesus to Africa, it likewise fails. Kingsolver parallels Christianity with politics and Western culture. Pay attention to this, as you read, and ask, Is the connection valid? Democracy is not a Christian principle. (It was developed by pagan cultures in Greece and Rome.) Neither is dynamite fishing, or American agriculture. In fact, if you've read the Bible, consider: is it really Western? It describes cultures that are quite different from our "Western" culture. Where was it written? Africa, Asia, and Europe. Not America. What ethnicity were most of the people in the Bible? Were they Western European or American? No, Jesus, Moses, the Prophets, and many others in the Bible were Jewish. Those who weren't Jewish were often other Middle Easterners or people that existed before the Jewish state and other well-known nations had come into existence. There are very few people that could be considered Western. Yet Kingsolver continues to lump Christianity with Western culture. "Jesus is a white man, so he will understand the law of [the majority]," says the village chief, echoing Kingsolver's position. Therefore, be alert as you read The Poisonwood Bible. It often suggests that Christianity is Western or that Christianity is just a tool used to modify other cultures; this isn't the case.
As you read The Poisonwood Bible, I'm sure you'll find Nathan Price to be disgusting, hard-headed, and simply unlikable. Consider the effect this has on the story, though; it seems that his character was designed to reflect poorly on the biblical Christianity that he allegedly represents. This becomes particularly apparent in his debate with Brother Fowles over Christian doctrine. Fowles is calm, collected, and friendly in stark contrast to Nathan Price. Understandably, the reader supports him in his debate against the "nasty" Nathan. When Fowles argues that parts of the Bible should be discarded and Nathan argues that the Bible should be fully accepted, whose part is the reader going to take? When you see this, ask yourself, Is Fowles's point more valid than Nathan's, or does it just seem that way because of how Kingsolver has set up the characters? Would I see this debate in a different light if Kingsolver had set up the characters differently? What does Kingsolver want her readers to believe? Another thing to pay attention to in The Poisonwood Bible is the rest of the Price family. Notice the cynical attitude of Adah towards the Christian faith is the only view that is portrayed as respectable. Leah originally tries to be a Christian (though her understanding of biblical of doctrine is somewhat lacking), and she can come off as a naïve, obnoxious goody-goody during this time in her life. Only when she rejects her faith and her father does she come off as perceptive and knowledgeable. It's notable that all the Price women go apostate by the end of the book, except for Rachel, who remains nominally Christian but lives an adulterous lifestyle and shows little concern with actually following Christ. This picture painted by Kingsolver continues to reveal her anti- biblical Christianity viewpoint. Again, be wary of the impression Kingsolver tries to leave by developing her characters in the way she does. It's not just that Nathan is one individual who's missed it. It's that he represents biblical Christianity - in essence he's a "straw man" used to attack Christian doctrine.
Kingsolver goes beyond attacking Christ and his followers, but consistently develops a pantheistic religious system. `Pantheism' may not be a familiar concept to some, so let me explain: pantheism literally means, "all is god." Essentially, it teaches that the forces of nature, or that the universe itself, is god. Those who believe in a `pantheistic god' do not believe in God the Creator as known in the Bible. Let me give a few examples of pantheistic thought in The Poisonwood Bible. Kingsolver stresses that "the rules are different" in Africa. She, time and time again, tries to show that "Western" ideas do not work in Africa. (Remember, she has erroneously stressed that Christianity is merely one of these "Western" ideas.) Dynamite fishing doesn't work because there is no refrigeration. American farming doesn't work, because you have to make "hills" in Africa and the American pollination bees aren't present in Africa. Kingsolver also stresses different social standards in Africa - the modesty of women and the practice of polygamy are two that quickly come to mind. Africa itself is personified as an unchangeable entity throughout the book. The Prices came to change Africa, but Africa will stay the same while the family is changed. This notion that a geographical place (i.e. Africa) is bound by certain rules while other places are bound by other rules seem to reflect the ancient notion of `tribal gods.' Many ancient polytheistic nations believed in their own set of gods that were deity in their own land but had little influence outside of it. Kingsolver's construction of Africa as an unchangeable entity perhaps could almost be brushed aside as merely "agricultural" or "ethnic" had she not specifically applied this philosophy to religion. Brother Fowles draws some humor from his possible interpretations of a passage in Acts 16, but a simple review of the phrase in context or a little study of the Greek word should clear up the "confusion" that Fowles tries to make in the passage. Fowles (page 251, my book), allegedly a Christian minister, mocks the Scripture and says (p. 247) "a whole lot of chapters, sure, you just have to throw away" when you come to Africa. Note how much more open-minded Brother Fowles seems than Nathan and his family in these pages, and remember that Kingsolver probably has more leanings towards "Fowles" doctrine, and therefore represents his beliefs as more enlightened. The idea that Fowles expresses and Kingsolver endorses is essentially that whatever is worshipped can vary based on time and place. This doctrine seems to resemble the ancient tribal god tradition, which is prevalent in polytheism. Polytheistic doctrine, in turn, is evidence of pantheism. (Pantheism and polytheism are often closely intertwined, as polytheistic "gods" can be pantheistic "forces" personified. Consider, for instance, Poseidon, who represents sea force in Greek Mythology.) The evolutionary undertones present in The Poisonwood Bible also give evidence to its pantheistic doctrine. Evolution is often misconstrued as scientific, so let me pause from the analysis of The Poisonwood Bible to demonstrate the significance of its religious nature.
Evolution Many people think that evolutionism was developed as a young Charles Darwin spent time observing nature in the Galapagos Islands, especially the changing beaks of finches. This isn't quite accurate. First of all, this observance of changing finch-beaks within a kind of bird is called natural selection. Despite popular belief, natural selection was a phenomenon well-known and accepted twenty-five years before Darwin's book, if not earlier, by creationists such as Edward Blythe, and it is not the same thing as molecules-to-man evolution. Darwin held close communication with a man named Charles Lyell, who was probably largely responsible for giving him his evolutionist ideas. Lyell was a lawyer and amateur geologist who wished to undermine faith in Moses's record (i.e. Genesis through Deuteronomy) and developed the uniformitarian model of geology. This stated that the present is the key to the past; that geological process operate at constant rates, and therefore it takes long periods of time to form rock layers. (The other view is known as catastrophism; it states that rock formation occurs quickly, during cataclysmic events, such as floods and volcano eruptions. Lyell's uniformitarianism gained popularity over catastrophism, and it remained the dominant theory of geology for a long time, but recently it has been called into question on many accounts.) But even Lyell was not the ultimate source for evolution. Even as Darwin formulated his own ideas, another man named Alfred R. Wallace adhered to almost the same theory. However, he did not receive his instruction from observing finches. Wallace was heavily involved in the occult and "received" his evolutionary doctrine while in an altered state of consciousness. These two men highlight the main two "divisions" of evolutionism today. Darwin represents naturalistic, atheistic thought commonly believed today - that matter is the ultimate reality. Wallace represents the "spiritist" version of evolutionism, that is dominant in the New Age movement and other cults. But neither of these men were the true originators of evolutionism. It's likely that each were indirectly influenced by far older evolutionary ideas, such as the Great Chain of Being, a pagan concept that survived in the ostensibly "Christian" Middle Ages. In fact, many evolutionary ideas have mellenia-old history. Writing that is essentially the same as modern materialism can be found in Greek documents 2500 years old. Many ancient religions are pantheistic and polytheistic in nature. In The Long War Against God, Henry Morris documented evolutionary thinking in many pagan religions and ancient cultures. He also described the striking similarities in astrological systems throughout the world. After tracing evolutionary thinking back to ancient Sumeria, he postulates that an original evolutionary, astrology-based religion was set up by Nimrod in his famous rebellion against God (Genesis 11) at Babel, and that religion has spread with humanity to permeate pagan thought systems throughout the world.
This has been a brief summary of evolution, but I hope it highlights the importance of evolutionary doctrine in pantheism. The Poisonwood Bible makes some subtle-but-important endorsements of evolution that should not go unnoticed. For instance, Orleanna refuses to eat monkey meat, because it looks too much like a relative, alluding to the evolutionary idea that man and monkeys are kin. Adah echoes evolutionary history faithfully: "...the Rift Valley cradled a caldron of bare necessities, and out of it walked the first humans upright on two legs. With their hands free, they took up tools and beat from the bush their own food and shelter and their own fine business of right and wrong." Thus, Adah reflects evolutionary doctrines of evolutionary biology, the origin of man, and the history of religion, none of these proven by science but accepted dogmatically by evolutionary doctrine. Another evidence of pantheism presented in The Poisonwood Bible is the deification of nature. Nature is presented as an entity, the almost-but-not-quite personified sort that is prevalent in pantheism. Occasionally nature is worshipped, and this is portrayed as completely acceptable and even natural. "It's a grand way to begin a church service, singing a Congolese hymn to the rainfall on the seed yams [emphasis added]," says the "Christian" Brother Fowles with enthusiasm. Adah says. "I don't have cats or children, I have viruses," and goes on to explain her "relationship" with her study of this part of nature. Adah perhaps sums up The Poisonwood Bible's pantheistic doctrine best: "God is everything, then. God is a virus. Believe that, when you get a cold. God is an ant, too, for driver ants are possessed, collectively..." Now, in "The Eyes in the Trees," we see the "reincarnation" of Ruth May into a snake, a concept present in pantheistic/polystheistic religions such as Hinduisum. Perhaps the furthest step into dark doctrine is taken in this final "book." Mother Orleanna, throughout the book, had spoken to her dead daughter, Ruth May. It's in the last chapter that "Ruth May" speaks back. Such a practice, so far as I know, is not in pantheism, but goes beyond pantheism: commining with "the dead" is only found in spiritist religions (demonism).
1. Kingsolver consistently portrays her characters and dialogue in a way that ridicules biblical Christianity. 2. Kingsolver expresses her own pantheistic doctrine as evidenced by -concepts akin to "tribal god" systems -evolutionary teaching -deification of nature -"God is everything" statements -reincarnation -taking pantheism to its conclusion, spiritism
Merits multiple readings The editorial reviews and the other 1409 reader reviews provide as much commentary on this remarkable book as one might want. Needless to say, I enjoyed the story. It operates at several levels just like life. You might dislike some characters but they all seem real to me, sharply etched. You might not like what they say, it can be provocative, thought provoking. You might even imagine the story to be true. I can.
As I reread the story, I find new aspects, not necessarily intended by the author, but ones that result from the interaction of the story and the life I know. If you enjoy deep literature, you will probably enjoy this book. If you are a scientist, as is the author, you will be pleasantly reminded that some scientists write extraordinarily well. The descriptions of the natural world are noticeably precise which alone separates this book from the average contemporary novel.
If, like me, you find the narrative sometimes difficult, especially child Adah's, I recommend an audio version.
A book I just couldn't get into I've heard from many people that this is a book you either love, or hate. For me, I just couldn't get into it. My friend, a big reader, told me that this book was one of her "all time favorites". With such a fabulous referral, I had to read it.
The story seems interesting: A Southern pastor and his family travel on a mission to the Congo. I kept reading, thinking that I would become captured if I just read a few pages more. One hundred pages into the book, however, I finally gave up.
My advice is to probably give this book a try. There are many people that loved it. I'm just one of those that didn't.
Painful and Boring Every Oprah book I've purchased has been a great disappointment and this is no exception. My friend begged me to read this and the story seemed compelling.
At first I enjoyed the alternating viewpoints amongst the five women. After awhile it became irritating. There is suffering throughout the whole book and no redeeming aspects at all. I did muddle through the whole book thinking it would get better but it only got more boring. I felt no connection to the characters at all.
I agree with others and found Kingsolvers depiction of the "evil white people" offensive. Just my two cents.
I can't say enough good things about this novel I love the Poisonwood Bible. It's easily on my list of favorite books. It's a heartwrenching story of the disintegration and survival of a family. Kingsolver rotates the pov through the four daughters and you learn to love them all, even the shallow Rachel. And that takes a great deal of skill to turn a character like Rachel into an interesting and lovable person. Even the chapters told from Ruth May, the baby of the family, manage to hold my attention. Great novel, one that everyone should read.
Anything Goes Trivia
Megaton Man
Tony's Online Tips
Trevor
