Books

The movie Lilies in the Fields was on television recently so I went out and read the novella it was based on. I don't recall all of the movie, but the two basically overlap in general particulars.

The movie is somewhat more extended since the book is basically something of a long short story. Little things like the ending (how Homer left) and there not being a church in town were changed in the film. Both work well.  The author wrote many other books too.

Both are touching, humane, and good examples of their craft. It also shows how a religious themed work can have wide audience. One person noted the way to do a good Christian film is to tell a good story, the Christianity not the key aspect for success. 

==

Joshua Prager told aspects of The Family Roe in the past, including an article on Roe co-counsel (still alive) Linda Coffee. Another person addressed with special focus (she's the first photo in the inserts) is the pioneer black woman physician, and anti-abortion advocate, Mildred Jefferson. The book is very good. It's just too darn long for my tastes these days.

At times, at least, probably would push back in other ways.  The book starts with the idea that when Roe was handed down that there was not much division.  Abortion was an issue in the 1972 elections, decided before the opinion was even handed down.  I also know chunks of this story, and if the author (per that article) only learnt in 2010 that Norma gave birth to "Baby Roe," well, I surely knew long before then.  

I surely do not know many details, including about each of her daughters, but there is only so much I need to know there.  The main book is around five hundred damn pages long.  This subject surely deserves an in depth analysis, but even there, various of these figures have been covered before.  The core "new" material makes up how much of even this volume?  

Again, various aspects, including more about Linda Coffee and an abortion provider named Curtis Boyd also cited notably is a teenager geared history of abortion (well recommended btw) is appreciated.  And, to the degree there is a bit of pushback (e.g., should Linda and Sarah have done more to at least try to get Norma an abortion? I still question if that was at all possible since she was likely at least four months pregnant even when they first met*), it's good to get that too from a basically friendly source.

But, it for me -- at least at this time -- is a matter of the book being so long. I know it is partially my Internet use.  Still, there are many options out there, and spending the time to read 500 page long books, including someone who is not that quick of a reader, warrants special dispensation.  

"Painfully" detailed?  Yeah. 

Unlike the other review cited, this one suggests the book is perfectly framed for the moment.  The review also shows there are a lot of great details in the book.  One bit is when Norma (multiple lesbians in this story) basically expresses she had a crush on the young and fresh looking Sarah Weddington (something about "darn she had a lot of hair").  

[You can see how pretty SW must have been from some of the photos available with the cute soft Texas accent coming thru on the oral argument video.  She soon had more professional hair and by the 1980s lost that young look.  It is a pretty stark change.]

Well covered topics have so many details that new books are likely to have some more.  The details here are not always pretty.  Mildred Jefferson and Linda Coffee, for instance, had various unpleasant things happen to them.  Jefferson, the anti-abortion physician, doesn't really come off as a psychologically healthy individual, including having issues with hording.

The review also notes that the author quotes law professor Mary Ziegler, an expert on Roe’s history, as saying: “The abortion conflict is a tale of hopeless polarization, personal hatreds and political dysfunction.”  He also cites her as saying that no matter how the latest challenges fall in the Supreme Court, the battle would continue.  

This suggests to me personally that those who think Roe being decided was so fundamental itself miss something.  It was part of a wider story.  And, the fact the "Family Roe" itself consists of so many characters is a plus on its side.  But, skimming it fully, I really think it could have been condensed. 

---

* The book's account of the matter seems garbled to me. 

First, it is noted that Norma was probably too far along, probably at least twenty weeks.  Then, it was more unclear; maybe, the lawyers did not do enough to at least try to see how far along, or maybe even try to get her an abortion (in Mexico or something, like Sarah Weddington did).

Later, it is noted that Sarah Weddington even began to lie and say Norma on purpose didn't have an abortion, to prevent the case from being moot. It is not noted if the author or someone else flagged the issue with her; the author himself after all talked to SW as part of his research.  

Also, why would SW worry about mootness?  After all, it was a class action. The fact she would no longer be pregnant given the length of the case was a given.  

I also remember once someone flagging the fact as a matter of policy abortions were allowed in cases of rape.  That was vaguely cited during oral argument, but the implication was (if at all) that would be done very early.  Not as far along as she was.  

(Anyway, she wasn't raped, and at best vaguely referenced it in a "if it helps" sort of way.  The law itself did not have a rape exception, unlike the more liberal Georgia law. 

BTW, it was noted in other accounts that the "Bolton" in that case was pro-choice.  We learn in this book that "Wade" was as well.  This is a bit of a surprise given how pro-life the argument got to be by the end, suggesting in fact that even allowing abortion was problematic.)