Nora was competent, flexible, calm and beautiful – kind of intimidating, I’d say! Anyway, people with flaws are more interesting. I identified strongly with Abby and was appalled that she died as soon as she did.
Here is the passage @oregon101 referred to in post 74:
To think that Nora “must not be very bright” is rather harsh (is it because of her odd use of the word “dative”?) I think the Whitshanks are so insulated by their own family’s culture and traditions that they find “outsiders” hard to understand. I agree with NJTM’s adjectives describing Nora. I think the huge sacrifice that she and Stem made to move in with Abby and Red was underappreciated. I can’t imagine ever doing such a thing when my children were small–such an upheaval for the family, not to mention a logistical nightmare.
I liked Nora’s conversation in the car with Denny at the end of the book. She doesn’t make any grand speeches or provide brilliant insights; she is simply very kind, and a good listener. Denny reveals more of himself to her in that moment than he does to anyone else.
… And I wanted to be Nora. 
oregon101: In addition to the above quote re Merrick’s life (post #79), the few times we glimpse Merrick she just doesn’t seem likeable. She greets “Norma”:
She asks after “Sarah.”
It continues to go downhill in a barely polite way - she manages to offend all present except the dogs - till Stem indicates she’s to leave. (p. 125-133) Hard to believe that the words happy and perfectly content go together with Merrick.
^ @ignatius, I agree about Merrick not being likeable, but as for “happy and perfectly content,” I could go either way. What I mean is, the passage you quote indicates that Merrick is clueless and self-absorbed. And I think clueless and self-absorbed people can be quite content–they just drive the rest of us nuts! On the other hand, it’s hard to believe she can be self-absorbed enough to tune out a lifetime with an argumentative boor.
To expand on SouthJerseyChessMom’s post #75 on “The Wizard of Oz”: I would add that the characters in that film (and book) are anxious to acquire something they don’t really need. Each one already possesses what is necessary for happiness. I think there is some of that element in A Spool of Blue Thread–be it Junior and the house, Merrick and the husband, Abby and the orphans or Denny and his multiple occupations.
^^^ I think Merrick is her father’s child: wants but not quite content once she gets. I can see why she wouldn’t be but Junior not so much.
And to expand on the shades of blue: Denny has trouble finding the right shade of blue to mend Red’s dashiki and then Abby “hands” it to him along with the gift of forgiveness. Deeper meaning, yes?
I loved this part.
It’s sort of an odd question. I’m sure Red would be glad that Abby’s death was instantaneous, in that she did not suffer. However, Abby had not reached the point in either mental or physical decline where a quick death would be viewed as a blessing. I think losing Abby was a tragedy for Red.
I wonder if it made him reflect more on the death of his own parents, especially on the fact that they went together. Not that Red would willingly choose death – it’s just hard to be the one left behind.
Any thoughts on why Abby opts for Red over Dane? Do you think she was really in love with Red or did he just seem like the safer choice? I can see why Dane would appeal to Abby, as someone to rescue–another orphan ("…his mother had up and left his father and gone to live in Hunt Valley with the man who boarded her quarter horse" [p. 227]).
The things that struck me about Abby’s death (hopefully I remember correctly):
Abby hopes to pass away surrounded by family (and then, of course, doesn’t).
Abby can’t imagine Red on his own without her. Later, as Red contemplates Abby’s death, he can’t imagine her on her own without him.
The driver of the car keeps mentioning the death of the poor dog (not Abby) - one of the Tyler touches of humor that sneaks up on you.
And then Abby and Dane: I think Dane is Abby’s “bad boy” stage but moves out of her comfort level. I think maybe she’s just ready for Red - a certain comfort level, sure - her dad owns a hardware store, after all. Though if she’s looking for someone to rescue, Junior supplies the need at that awful lunch.
Yes, she can be so subtly funny, no matter how sad the situation.
Red’s comments on the reverend’s sermon at the funeral also gave me a chuckle:
I must be lacking in humor. I didn’t really see humor in the woman seeming more distressed about killing the dog than killing Abby. I just thought it was strange. I did like Red’s comments, that Mary posted above, about the Reverend saying Abby was going into a “vast consciousness”. This quote
sums up Red and Abby’s personalities. Abby was a free spirit and Red was defiinitely “concrete”.
^ black humor, for sure – it’s tasteless, but we Irish were raised on it. 
I doubt the driver is more distressed about killing the dog. She comes to the house - the family - the day after the accident, upset and apologizing. She has a bad time with foot-in-mouth disease, mentioning the dog rather than Abby. As Mary points out, black humor. The unexpectedness of her comments hit me.
That makes sense. I’ve got Irish in me. I guess just not enough.
I thought Abby’s unsatisfactory funeral was a real Anne Tyler moment. Funny, sad, and somehow totally right for her.
Two interesting interviews:
http://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/feb/15/anne-tyler-interview-i-am-not-a-spiritual-person-spool-of-blue-thread
http://thedianerehmshow.org/audio/#/shows/2015-02-12/anne_tyler_a_spool_of_blue_thread/109466/@00:00
^^^ From The Guardian link in the above post:
This! The stop in narrative with a step back in time to a young Abby and then another step back in time to a young Linnie and Junior seems to be a sticking point for many readers. I know that NJTM mentioned bumping up against it. I have mixed feelings: it makes sense to take that stop because I don’t see how the sections could have worked into the narrative and I like them. On the other hand, it gives an abrupt tug down a path you may not be ready to follow. Another complaint stems from the open-endedness of the book: Denny remains an enigma. (Personally, I like how the book ends - the last section just seemed so right.) I like seeing how Tyler addresses it.
Love it!
Friends with John Waters: I like. I read Waters’ book Carsick, in which he recounts his cross-country hitchhike (from Baltimore to San Francisco). Only about a third recounts his trip while the other two thirds or so relate worst case and then best case fantasy scenarios. He should have just stopped with the real thing … but then that’s not John Waters, is it? (Washington Post: “Both of these imaginary trips are amusing, and they give Waters the chance to give full rein to his powers of invention; not everything that he invents can be discussed in polite company, not to mention a family newspaper.” http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/headline/2014/06/06/b98ca0c4-e59d-11e3-a86b-362fd5443d19_story.html) For the record: he stepped over my line of okay, but again … that’s John Waters, isn’t it? (Not recommending the book here.)
I wasn’t sure how to interpret this. Does she mean that she might continue writing about the Whitshank family (going backward in time) for a future novel?
By the way, in the audio interview, Tyler mentions that Abby was having a series of small strokes. Thinking about Abby’s symptoms, that makes sense to me. After my Dad had a couple of TIAs, he was totally himself and functioning well, except that he could no longer remember which way to turn to reach the back door of the house he’d lived in for 50 years. A small, peculiar loss – sort of like Abby’s confusion with the family dogs’ names.
@ignatius your comments are excellent about the disjointed nature of the book. Isn’t it interesting that Waters and Tyler are such close friends, and Tyler is a fan of The Wire. She is quite an enigma, writing about families, but with quirky twist.
@mary 13 doesn’t she mean by writing about the ancestors of her characters, she would not run out of material, although if she started back far enough she would not make it to present time. Confusing.
And, vascular dementia is a series of small strokes, primarily effecting a specific region in the brain. So someone may have difficulty with spatial issues, and yet, not be impaired verbally. My friend’s husband, has vascular dementia ( many mini strokes, he was unaware or having )and alzheimers which is called MIXED dementia. I don’t think TIA’s cause permanent damage, but can precede more serious strokes.
TIA-
Dementia is so strange. My mother has Parkinson’s and most of the time she seems fine, but she is totally confused about time - yesterday, today, tomorrow seem to be very hard for her to sort out, though she has no problem telling you what she did a few days ago. Having seen what full-blown dementia is like with my dh’s mother, I was very glad Abby died the way she did.
So if she wrote the book backwards, do you think she started in the right place? Did you want to know about the generation before or not? I don’t think I did, and I can’t imagine Tyler going back further in time - I don’t think she’s ever written anything that is set in a time much before what she has actually lived.
I did not particularly care for the structure of the book. I don’t know if I just wasn’t paying sufficient attention, but I got somewhat confused as to whose kids belonged to which generation.
Aha! I finally got around to listening to all 51 minutes of the Anne Tyler interview and learned the answer to the question above re “I wrote it backwards so I wouldn’t use up the generations before I died."
Anne Tyler said that her initial plan was to write about the Whitshank family endlessly; that since she is happiest when writing, she would just write on and on, moving the family backwards in time until “cave days” – and then let her children decide what to publish after her death. But she realized as the novel progressed that she wasn’t interested in earlier generations and concluded the story when it felt right to do so. She said that there would be no future Whitshank novels, that sequels “are always paler than the book that precedes them.”
Other interesting tidbits from the interview (for those who might not have a chance to listen):
- "Coveting" is a theme of the book: Junior covets the Brill's house; Denny covets the attention that he perceives Stem is getting from Abby and Red; Abby covets the toddler Stem, even though he belongs to another mother ("I need this! I have to do this!" [p. 90] -- Tyler read the passage aloud).
- The Diane Rehm show was the first live interview Tyler has done in 50 years, and she does not do book tours. She said that interviews and touring require a completely different skill set than writing, and she doesn't like the fact that they are so closely linked in today's publishing world. She laughingly remarked that it's like saying, "You love to roller skate, so why don't you become a pastry chef?" (I have to note here, though, that she sounded quite at ease during the interview, so I think she underestimates herself.)
- When asked which author she would recommend to authors, Tyler said Canadian novelist Mary Lawson, who also writes about families and whose latest book is *Road Ends*. http://www.amazon.com/Road-Ends-Novel-Mary-Lawson-ebook/dp/B00HKXQT6O/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1433817275&sr=1-1&keywords=mary+lawson+road+ends