To satisfy my curiosity, I took the trouble to surf the Internet and read history books and biographies of the historical characters so I could compare historical facts to what is portrayed in Kingsolver’s book. I easily saw that she did not portray the real world honestly and fairly. She emphasized some facts and omitted other, very important ones. In doing this, she has presented a distorted worldview that, coupled with her pathetic characterization of the Christian missionary Nathan Price, makes me wonder what point she was trying to get across to the reader.
Kingsolver has her characters criticize the West, particularly the United States, for trying to intervene when the Congo became independent in 1960 and Patrice Lumumba became Prime Minister. She has one of her characters seeing newspaper headlines of "Soviet plan moves forward in Congo" and "Khrushchev wanted to take over the Belgian Congo.” One of her characters hears that Eisenhower had ordered Lumumba's death. Another hears that Secretary of State Dulles sent a telegram, “…to replace the Congolese government at earliest convenience.”
Kingsolver's readers would rightly wonder why the United States became so involved in the internal affairs of the Congo. Kingsolver even has a character mention that Lumumba asked Khrushchev to come to the Congo's aid, but the character felt that Lumumba was bluffing. What most readers won’t remember, and Kingsolver did not mention it, is that in 1959, Khrushchev brought Castro's Cuba into the Soviet circle.
All Americans should remember the Cuban missile crisis of the 1960's because it was the closest the world ever came to nuclear war. I do not condone what the United States did in the Congo, but knowing about Cuba, I can realize the seriousness of Lumumba's bluff and the panic of the United States State Department trying to prevent a Soviet foothold in Central Africa.
I’m not trying to defend United States foreign policy, but just to be informed of the real facts, I read a biography of Patrice Lumumba written by his personal friend, Thomas Kanza - The Rise and Fall of Patrice Lumumba: Conflict in the Congo. In it, Kanza quotes verbatim Lumumba's request for aid to Khrushchev and states his opinion that his friend "Lumumba was involved in a dangerous, perhaps mortal, struggle; for though the West wanted to save the Congo, it had had enough of (Lumumba).”
Kingsolver states the Congo was exploited for gold, diamonds, copper, ivory, and slaves. She didn't mention uranium, but Kanza did. Uranium, being of strategic importance in the cold war, still doesn't excuse the West, but mention of it would make the West's panic more understandable.
Article comments
1 - Hou Keat
Probably it's easier to read a novel as just fiction and don't compare it to the real world.
2 - william hart
your critique of this book is right on! my son had to read this book in a high school english class, and i resented the bias and the imbalance in the class where no real criticism of the book was allowed.
there is great literature to be discussed, but not in the english classes of america-mind numbed zombies only, please.
3 - starchild
Do you know what happened in the Congo under Belgian rule? Kingsolver lived in Africa with her missionary parents. She knows. Do you blame Africans for not trusting the white man's god, considering it was the white men who came in, raped their land of all resources, forced them to enter into nothing better than slavery, separated families, and mutilated many people of the region?
Just so you know, I am white and I am educated also.
4 - Midnight Ryder
I agree with much of what you are saying. It does seem markedly anti-Christian. However, the character's name is NATHAN Price, not Nelson. ;)
5 - Dawn
While the novel certainly has strong anti Christian sentiments I would argue that its main point is against Christian Colonialism and the arrogance that fuels it. Not so much the religion itself but its forced acceptance upon those who already have steadfast beliefs.
6 - Mike
I also think the book is very much anti-men. While I am enjoying reading the book, it disturbs me on many levels; as a man, and a Catholic, I am particularly disturbed by the malevolent Christianity it portrays (we aren't all Nathan Prices), and by the very negative image it portrays of the male characters in the book, with a few exceptions.
In short more feminist anti-Christian tripe, just what the world needs...
7 - Pat
Excellent book and I would recommend it to all. Review and comments (above) I guess to be from fundamentalist types - women should be under men and all that.
8 - zoe
First of all, the character's name is Nathan Price! anddd it took place in Belgian not Belgium, Congo!!!!
I also don't believe Kingsolver was criticizing christianity or negative towards it in any way, it is a work of fiction.
9 - Jr
Personally, I thought the portrayal of Nathan to be beautifully done. While he has many flaws, the author shows the reader his background and where he came from; in the end, while I was disapproving of his behavior, I was also completely understanding of it. I felt pity more than resentment for him.
And based on your last comment, I have a feeling that you didn't catch a few of the themes within the book. The Rift Vally, of course, refers to the early cradles of human civilization (such as the Nile River floodplains). Humans, in early societies, built upon a shaky foundation to reach the collective point that we're at today. The part you quote, I believe, is a metaphor for the humankind's "juvenile" nature, as it had to evolve and adapt within its social boundaries, and society eventually matured and advanced as a result of this constant mutation of human interests. "Voodoo" referred to the earliest notions of religion and of attempting to understand the world, providing the roots for all of religion that we have today (Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, everything). I think the author tried to connect the human element with the spiritual element of religion, claiming that we are all of the same, just trying to look at the world through our own perspectives.
And at the previous comments: I think that some of you were rather stung at the portrayal of Nathan :) I don't believe that the author was trying to criticize ALL aspects of Christianity. Indeed, within her story were compassionate Christian followers who were sympathetic to the Africans' viewpoints. What she criticizes is the ethnocentric view that is embodied in the attempt at complete, uncompromising conversion, AKA the path of Nathan. The author wants us to embrace all viewpoints, and to treat each other equally. Unfortunately, much of Christian history is marked by intolerance and pain (but as society advances, I remain idealistic and believe that Christianity grows towards tolerance and compassion day by day!).
10 - Jason
"Human beings did not originate out of a cauldron of bare necessities in the Rift Valley. God created the first humans. Voodoo is not the Earth's oldest religion. The relationship the first humans had with God is the world's oldest religion."
Nope. The Great Rift Valley is one of the original cradles of civilization in human history. And the first stabs at religion did not even involve a human-like figure, as embodied in many current religions. They had more to do with events in nature, akin to Animism.
11 - SLC
The problem with this book is that people like Nathan would never exist. No person (nevermind a missionary) would claim to be a Christian yet be so selfish and unloving. Kingsolver just makes Nathan to be that way in order to undermine the truth of Christianity and the Bible.
12 - ZK
umm .. u're wrong.. it's not nelson price, it's NATHAN price!!
13 - davidedwards
I think blogcritics needs to make sure the critics actually read the book. This book has very little to do with Nathan, he is a very minor character, and an antagonist. Kingsolver is NOT displaying her thoughts on Christianity through Nathan. The book is about 5 women and their views on faith. The main character, Leah, comes to love all of God's creation, despite her father's hypocritical and rancorous doctrine. I am disappointed that people are reading this book in such a shallow way, as the poisonwood bible helped me define my faith.
14 - LB
i agree with davidewards. the book was all about following brother fowles' and leah's doctrine, wich were all about loving oneself and others and the world God has made for us. nathan price is just the bad guy. plus the political stuff wasnt as biased as everyone is making it sound. it was just background info. the important stuff was in the village
15 - laurasalles
omg this review pissed me off so much! its not a critcism of christianity its a commentary on the power of faith.
16 - Lilka
I wouldn't expect a review written by Nathan Price himself to be positive. If you haven't met any fundamentalist Christians who resemble Nathan Price then prehaps switch on your television and watch your televangelists, or just to your local church, I'm sure you'll find lots of them their (unless you can't recoignise them, by virtue of being one yourself).
17 - Lynn
Thoughtful comments appreciated. Book reviews reflect the reviewers point of view as much as books reflect the author's. "There are Christians, and there are christians". Ms. Kingsglover sadly has painted them, white people, western wealth all with the same brush. Her story was captivating, so well written, I couldn't put it down, yet for me, a little too much of the author's worldview.
18 - barb wilbur
I agree, Christianity never appears in a positive light. Very little faith.
19 - the shadow knows
i agree with davidewards. the book was all about following brother fowles' and leah's doctrine, wich were all about loving oneself and others and the world God has made for us. nathan price is just the bad guy. plus the political stuff wasnt as biased as everyone is making it sound. it was just background info. the important stuff was in the village
you are so wrong. Imagine it was criticizing secularists you people would have a fit. deal with it.
20 - Kelcie T.
If you go and read an interview with the author, you would see that Kingsolver used this novel to portray her political views, not her views on Christianity. Nathan was used as a political allegory, not as a representation of Christianity as a whole. Although I do believe that the novel is biased, it's fiction. What do you expect? She created a story worth reading, and what you get out of it is strictly up to you.
21 - Sue
I appreciate reading these comments and the review. I was not very far into the book when I felt there would not be enough in it worthy of my time. I know it is fiction, but not my kind of fiction!
22 - twox wilson
the author of this article and his offense....humm...reminds me a bit of the character Nathan in the book...just can't seem to accept an opinion or definition that doesn't fit your own..