How to Be Good

I read this book over a year ago and I can't stop thinking about the questions it raises. Who among us does not wish to be "good"? How many of us could even define what that means to us? Katie and David are like so many of us; at once we can find them both despicable and sympathetic. I found this book had laugh out loud moments sandwiched between pathos. Perhaps the most lingering questions are raised by the ending. I have convinced many friends to read this book just so I could hear another opinion about "what happened?" I highly recommend this book to people who like to ponder.

The central character of How to be Good, is Doctor Carr -- in her late thirties, a practicing physician and woman burdened by a marital crisis when the book opens. She wants to leave her cynical, semi-employed, journalist husband, partly inspired to do so by an affair she having with a more attentive lover, Stephen. What happens to keep her in the marriage is the arrival of DJ Goodnews. He is possessed of seemingly shamanistic, curative powers and, in no time, Goodnews has transformed the good Doctor's husband. He ceases to be the locally renown curmudgeon and becomes, instead, a crusader for the poor, one who embodies the liberal spirit of helping those least able to help themselves. The Carr's house becomes a focal point for a block-wide effort to adopt the homeless. Monkey, a tall lanky, young man becomes the special guest of the Carr household. A beggar by day, he is also, as Dr. Carr realizes, the only member of the household earning an income other than herself -- David Carr and Goodnews being absorbed completely in their campaign of doing good. All this is hard on the marriage. Yet, Dr. Carr got what she wished for. Not sure that she likes it, she consults her own Delphic Oracle from an Anglican Church she has, in desperation, visited: Should she stay or divorce? This is a book about the limits of human kindness and idealism, both within a marriage and within the larger community. Most books that turn a marriage under a micro-scope fail to see how and where that relationship belongs in the larger world. Hornby's plot succeeds in doing just that and providing, along the journey, some very funny moments.

I was told that I would not be able to put down "How To Be Good," and it delivered -- I set aside most of my weekend chores to find out what became of the characters. The premise, although fanciful, was intriguing, because it seeks to answer a question many of us struggle with: how do you know for sure you're a good person? Katie Carr, the novel's protagonist, is struggling with that question, and with her disappointment in her domestic life. Married for 20 years and basically miserable, she is engaging in a half-hearted affair and considering divorce when her husband goes through an uncharacteristic spiritual conversion, changing the course of their future.Although the characters are stock (especially the couple's two children, who seem faceless they are so bland), the writing shines when it examines the guilt that accompanies the middle class lifestyle, and the desire to do something to assuage it. Although some of the symbolism is a bit obvious (the New Age guru who guides their spiritual change is named GoodNews), the inner conflict of the characters rings true.Like his two previous novels, Hornby is taking his protagonist on a journey from sniveling immaturity to greater depth. It differs from "High Fidelity" and "About A Boy", though, in its conclusions, which seem vague. Katie doesn't seem any happier at the end of this journey than she was to begin with; and some of the final thougths seem tacked on arbitrarily, including the silly final image, which doesn't satisfy. Maybe Katie is simply a selfish malcontent, like an older version of Will from "About A Boy". Although I'm all for readers drawing their own conclusions, something felt left out of the last chapter, as if Hornby needs to live a few more years before he decides what he thinks about all of this.

This is the first Nick Hornby book I've read. While I felt it compelling enough to pick up every night until I finished, I'm not running out to find another. There are books that provoke one or two emotions, usually satisfaction and/or a bubble of optimism. This isn't one of those feel-good novels that reassure you and your place in the world. Those, you can shut and be done with, no need to go back because there isn't a need to mine for more meaning. How to Be Good is deeper than that. It doesn't shock you or rock your world with new knowledge, but it infiltrates your foundations and gives them a nice big shove.Most of us like to think we're "good." We pay taxes, recycle, do not condone prejudices, take an interest in critically-praised works, believe in globalized humanitarianism, quietly put up with annoyances. We feel sorry for the poor, hungry, homeless, aspire to the Peace Corps or Habitat for Humanity, maybe even take part in organized religion. Okay, so does Katie Carr. She's a doctor after all - of course, SHE's good. Somehow in her complacent way of thinking, being a doctor and taking part in the abovementioned activities, automatically makes her a good person, no questions asked. It's just so *obvious,* right?No, not quite. That's where Hornby makes his point: is that all that it takes to be good? No, IT'S NOT ENOUGH, and what's more, it's pathetic to use the above criteria. Being good is surprisingly unpleasant and entails serious sacrifice. Katie is married to David, a pathologically angry man, whose rotten attitude would make the most jaded of us blanch in dismay. She's nearly a saint for somehow living with him for over two decades, but Katie is having a cheap affair. So much for her canonization (imagine, a doctor and a long-suffering wife - she had it made). Then David meets GoodNews, a strange young man with healing hands. Gone is his chronic back pain and his meanness, just when Katie is feeling justified for her misbehavior.David is dissonantly gentle, understanding, generous. He goes on a crusade to do his part to save the world. GoodNews moves in and they embark on a semi-spiritual journey to correct society's ills. They persuade neighbors to take in homeless kids, make the Carr kids befriend social outcasts, and give away everything from prized possessions to their carfare home. Katie resists every step of the way, futilely. Taking the reader with her, she struggles with reality and the aspirations of social responsibility, charity, autonomy, altruism, and hope. The more she lives with David, the less she feels she has any of these things. Her marriage and family also unravel as she questions her understanding of goodness because certainly David's actions are examples of true goodness making Katie (and probably most readers) feel like a sham.The deeper you get into the book, the more you begin to feel increasingly battered and enervated as Katie. David is - if possible - too good. Katie goes on

Hornby's exploration of the true definition of "being good" was both entertaining and thought-provoking. It highlights the hypocrisy of the British middle class (and everyone else), who are determined to "be good" but never seem to truly suceed. Katie Carr thinks she is 'good'on account of being a doctor, but questions the meaning of her life, marriage and "being good" throughout the novel. She has the type of guilt which we all possess - that we are more advantaged than some people and should help them. However, all the characters' efforts to "be good" have bad consequences. Katie's husband, David, becomes acquainted with a spiritual healer and proceeds on a mission to "do good". During this "selfless" crusade, many changes occur and discoveries are mad...Their son, Tom, starts to steal from others at school and one of the homeless youths David has re-housed also steals. Katie's family believe they are all liberal-minded people, but they display conservative values throughout the novel: they claim not to be capitalists, but they own three computers (one for each of the children and one for David); they sympathise with 'disadvantaged' people, but don't want to invite them to their home. If you really want to be political, the novel could be seen as a comment on the government (or indeed ALL governments)and how they claim to be "good", while creating "bad".Its not all as black and white as that. Although the ending could be viewed as nihilistic, it is ambiguous. Maybe there is no such thing as being totally good - not in politics, not in religion, not in life - but surely that's no reason to ignore the bad? The truth is that we all have our own moral guidelines and why should we be judged for them? Perhaps its not difficult to find good in the midst of bad, perhaps we should be happy with small achievements, even if we can't or don't change the world. You can read into this novel as much (or as little) as you like and you will find no definite answer. Perhaps the issue is there to be debated, as is the case with all ethics, for eternity.