logo

52 pages 1 hour read

E. L. Doctorow

The Book of Daniel

Fiction | Novel | Adult | Published in 1971

A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.

Book 1Chapter Summaries & Analyses

Book 1 Summary: “Memorial Day”

Content Warning: This section of the guide contains discussions of suicidal ideation, an attempt to die by suicide, and incestuous fantasies.

The Book of Daniel is divided into two timelines. In the primary timeline, set in 1967, Daniel Lewin (originally named Daniel Isaacson) writes his dissertation at Columbia University. He has a “deliberately cool” appearance. The focus of his dissertation is radical politics in the United States. This is particularly relevant to Daniel as his biological parents, Paul and Rochelle Isaacson, were executed after being found guilty of espionage on behalf of the Soviet Union. Daniel’s attempts to piece together his parents’ story form the secondary timeline.

In 1967, Daniel is writing his dissertation in the library of Columbia University. His research makes him think about Memorial Day, earlier in the year when he visited Massachusetts with his family. Daniel and his wife Phyllis have a young son named Paul, after Daniel’s biological father. While Daniel is 25 and on the cusp of completing his graduate degree, Phyllis is 19 and did not attend college. Daniel and his family hitchhike to the state hospital in Worchester, a “public facility for the mentally ill” (6). As he describes the hospital patients, Daniel is reminded of the Book of Daniel from the Old Testament, in which the Biblical Daniel interpreted “dreams, visions or apparitions” (13).

Daniel is visiting the hospital because his sister, Susan, is a patient there after attempting to die by suicide. At the hospital, Susan is watching television in the lounge. After a long and awkward silence, Susan blames their parents for what has happened to them. Susan has a unique ability to anger and annoy Daniel. He envies her directness and her ability to express her emotions. As he thinks about the Bible and God, Daniel becomes angry. He is not allowed to take Susan home from the hospital. His adoptive parents, he knows, would not approve of him doing so. His adoptive father Robert Lewin is a lawyer who works with disenfranchised people.

Daniel meets Susan’s therapist, Alan Duberstein, who reveals that the facility’s doctor has not yet finished his report on Susan’s condition. Daniel loathes Duberstein. The Lewins arrive and Daniel joins them in a meeting with the hospital staff. As they talk, Daniel notes that the Lewins are kind and gentle people. He and his sister, he believes, do not deserve the Lewins’ love because they are “cruel.” Privately, he is grateful to his sister for interrupting his dull research.

Daniel makes a mental itinerary of “subjects to be taken up” (19). Amid the social and political turmoil of 1967, he is trying to make sense of the world and his place within it. Like the Biblical Daniel, he is struggling to make sense of the visions in his mind. He remembers when he and Susan were young, attending a protest in honor of their parents. At the time, Daniel did not understand why he and his sister became the focus of the crowd’s attention, nor why people were chanting to “free them.” According to Daniel, the American political system has an innate tendency to slip into partisanship and violence in “in the years immediately after a war” (28).

After leaving Susan in the hospital, Daniel and his family accompany Duberstein and the Lewins to the restaurant where Susan attempted to die by suicide. Duberstein blames Susan’s political activism. Daniel resents the therapist’s implications and calls him a “schmuck,” leaving the table and finding himself in the same restroom where Susan “opened her veins” (34). Exiting, he sees her car in the parking lot. Daniel is reminded that his parents’ legacy is inescapable, no matter how hard he tries.

When Paul and Rochelle were alive, they lived with Daniel and Susan in the Bronx. Daniel recalls his mother being the practical one and his father being more idealistic, though both were dedicated to left-wing politics. Paul was well-educated and occasionally overly intellectual, as well as an avowed Marxist-Leninist. Rochelle treated Paul almost like a naïve child. Paul ran a small radio repair shop and Daniel enjoyed watching his father work. Daniel remembers the rage that his mother held toward social injustice. She believed in communism with an almost religious fervor, in contrast to Paul’s academic approach to the ideology. To this day, Daniel is not sure whether his parents were actually guilty of espionage.

Daniel delves into his childhood memories. The family was poor. He remembers his parents’ friends—including Dr. Mindish and his “cretin daughter”; Nate Silverstein and his wife; Henry Bergman; Ben Cohen; and the Kantrowitz sisters—all meeting in the family home before heading to a Paul Robeson concert. Though Rochelle disapproved, Paul decided to take young Daniel to the concert with them. Robeson was a “proud black Communist” (58), and he performed while groups protested outside. On the way home, their bus was unexpectedly diverted. Rochelle cradled her son as racist, anti-communist attackers threw missiles at their bus. When Paul tried to confront the attackers, he was beaten, and his arm was broken. Though he does not remember the journey home, Daniel remembers the image of his father recovering on the couch. He remembers realizing for the first time that his father was naïve in the face of violence, even though Paul may have saved his friends’ lives since he was “the only man who did anything” (64). Daniel compares his father’s actions to the role of Bukharin, who was tried and executed in Stalin’s show trials in the Soviet Union in 1938.

Daniel and his family drive Susan’s car back to the Lewin home. As they talk, Daniel thinks about when he met Phyllis. She is from a wealthy New York family who seemed wary of the reputation of Daniel’s family. As Daniel drives fast through the rain, Phyllis admits that she is worried that Daniel finds her boring, especially as his family has such “big deals of suffering” (72). Daniel drives faster and Phyllis becomes scared and eventually agrees to Daniel’s demand to remove her pants, at which point Daniel switches the narrative focus as he contemplates burning her with the car’s cigarette lighter.

After Daniel and Susan were adopted by the Lewins, they never talked about their parents. They fought often but grew accustomed to “life in the middle class” (77), which still embarrasses Daniel. Living with the Lewins was very different from living with his parents. Though the world wanted Daniel and Susan to forget their parents, he believes, they could never escape their parents’ reputations. Daniel stopped talking to Susan when he left for college, but he realized that he could never escape the reality of his parents’ executions. He reached out to Susan, by which time her personality had changed. She had developed a “commanding presence” and become sexually adventurous. Her openness about private matters confounded Daniel.

The narrative switches to a biography of Daniel’s grandmother written from her perspective. She was a Jewish woman who fled persecution in Europe by “Czarist maniacs.” In the United States, she married quickly and lived in poverty on the Lower East Side. She lost one son in a tragic accident and another to the 1918 flu, as well as two younger sisters in a factory fire. When her husband died, she was left with only Rochelle. Daniel remembers his grandmother, who cursed in Yiddish and gave him pennies. She tended to run away from home in her old age and she would be brought back by the police, developing a reputation as the “neighborhood crazywoman.” Daniel blames her bouts of madness on superstition. He compares her struggles to the Bolsheviks’ attempts to educate “the Russian peasants” (85). He wonders whether he and Susan have inherited her mental health condition.

Daniel has a difficult relationship with his homeland. He always feels judged because of his parent’s reputation. He cannot pledge himself to the country that killed his parents, nor can he commit to political radicalism for fear that he would be doing exactly what everyone expects him to do. As a result, he feels powerless. He is “deprived of the chance of resisting [his] government” (89) and resents the implication that any political activism he might embark upon may be the result of his inherited genes. He thinks about historical ways in which countries have executed those accused of treason.

Robert and Lise Lewin were good, respectable, and Jewish, making them the ideal candidates to take in the Isaacson children. When Daniel drives Susan’s car to the Lewin house, he finds a letter written to him from Susan. In the letter, she shares traumatic memories and her plans to build the Foundation for Revolution in their parents’ name using money from their trust fund. Daniel was not supportive of the project, which caused tension in their relationship. As a result, Susan sought to purge Daniel from her life. Daniel remembers how their argument over her plans for the Foundation ruined a Christmas meal the year before.

Daniel describes his grandmother’s wake in 1947. He remembers the comforting smells, the crowds of people that “filled the house” (102), and his mother’s sadness. He remembers overhearing his father talking about the targeting of the Communist Party by the government and the House Un-American Activities Committee. Paul decried the “Fascistic insanity” of America. One man stood out among the guests at the wake, but Daniel did not know his name. Leaving the funeral and getting lost in his thoughts, Daniel visited a local African American superintendent who had a strange relationship with his grandmother. The man, Williams, hinted to Daniel that his grandmother was not as “crazy” as his parents. Daniel and Williams argued, and then Daniel ran away. Now, Daniel reflects on how irrelevant and “obscure” his family had been at the time. He remembers his mother telling him that “an atom bomb had been dropped on Japan” (118).

Book 1 Analysis

The framing device for the story is Daniel’s dissertation, in which he attempts to lay out the reality of his parents’ executions. The semi-autobiographical subject of Daniel’s dissertation leads him to reflect on his memories; the resulting tangle of historical and personal narrative is reflected in the novel’s narrative style, which switches between first- and third-person point of view. This refusal to adhere to the typical narrative style is also evident in the chronology of the novel, which uses a non-linear structure to jump and forth across Daniel’s life as his mind wanders through the past. Like the dissertation that he is writing, he occasionally pauses his own narration to cite outside forces that bolster or contradict his argument. Through his fluctuating narrative style, Daniel demonstrates one of his key struggles with his past: he cannot be certain of anything. He is not sure whether his parents were traitors. He is not sure whether he is writing a biography or a thesis. In The Book of Daniel, there is no objective truth. No answer can soothe the trauma of Daniel’s past, even though he spends so much time and effort searching for catharsis. Instead, the novel becomes Daniel’s reckoning with himself. The switch in narration styles is evidence of this, as Daniel navigates between a past and a present where he cannot be sure whether he is a protagonist or a bystander. He may be a witness to or victim of the events described in the novel, and he can never be quite certain which he is.

The only recurring truth in the novel is the heavy toll that the executions of Paul and Rochelle Isaacson have taken on their children. While Daniel searches for an identity by trying to pin down the historical truth about his parents, his sister Susan is introduced in the aftermath of her own suicide attempt. The navigation of Generational Trauma drives the plot of the novel, with each traumatic memory inviting further introspection in Daniel’s narration. Daniel attempts to organize these memories into a coherent narration through his dissertation—with uncertain results. That memory weighs so heavily on Daniel is evident in his narration; the frequent jumps between past and present create a structural proximity between actions. Anything in the past is never more than a sentence away from the current moment, as Daniel is never able to leave behind what has happened to him. As much as he would like to focus, as much as he would like to complete his studies, the trauma of his past continues to assert itself as the only objective truth that he can depend upon. Susan’s attempt to die by suicide, on the other hand, represents her desire to escape the burden of memory. Rather than struggling to make sense of what has happened to them, as Daniel does, Susan simply wants the suffering to stop.

Daniel sees the world through dialectical structures in Ideological Tension with one another. For every thesis, there is an antithesis. These tense dualities are found everywhere. The past and the present; the first- and the third-person narration; the Isaacsons and the Lewins; Communism and capitalism; the United States and the Soviet Union; religion and secularism; innocence and guilt; life and death. In everything that Daniel describes, he sees its opposite pulling at it. He is his sister’s opposite, as well as her mirror. His biological parents are ever-present in his life, even as he talks to his adoptive parents. Unlike the Hegelian model of dialectics, however, Daniel is unable to arrive at any synthesis. The dualities of the world continue in conflict with one another, rarely coming together to produce any form of unity. Even the marriage between Daniel and Phyllis is never truly synthesized: She still feels socially ostracized by her family while Daniel emotionally and physically abuses her. The result of the social alienation that Daniel experiences is that, though he can recognize the dialectical structure of the world, he can never resolve it. In a postmodern sense, he is forced to reckon with the nonexistence of objective reality in favor of competing subjective perspectives. The competition drives the plot of the novel, as Daniel searches for a synthesis that never comes. By introducing these tensions early in the novel, The Book of Daniel establishes itself as an example of post-modernist fiction in search of a truth that remains forever elusive.

blurred text
blurred text
blurred text
blurred text