The Graveyard Book, by Neil Gaiman

Ghastly, Ghostly, Gruesome, Great!

Who loaned me this book? Robin? Tom-El? Whoever it was, I thank you. The Graveyard Book is the first thing I've read by juvenile fiction writer Neil Gaiman (whose name looks like caiman, a kind of crocodile), but it will not be the last. This book was justifiably given the Newbury medal for excellence in children's literature.

The pen and ink art is gorgeous
and evocative. The art program
adds an amazing amount of
atomsphere.

I found this book in a side pocket of my suitcase when I was unpacking at a Youthbuild gathering in Kentucky. Surrounded by trees on a mountainside near Hazard, I took every chance to be peacefully by myself and, as it turned out, reading. The Youthbuild gathering was terrific, but it was the quiet time that meant the most to me. Hundreds of birds singing, the hum of ceiling fans on a huge screened porch...in this alternative world, I was easily drawn into Gaiman's eerie otherness.

The Graveyard Book is set in--guess where--a graveyard. A toddler whose parents are murdered wanders away through a door left open by the killer and ends up in the graveyard late at night, when the ghosts are out going about their nightly business. The ghosts take the toddler under their protection and decide to raise him as one of their own. (Gaiman says that he modeled this book on Kipling's Jungle Book, in which a child is raised by jungle animals, but I thought most of Harry Potter.)

Gaiman presents the ghostly community straight on...doesn't need to justify it or explain it. He sort of made me wonder why I ever thought ghosts did NOT live perfectly interesting lives at night. Dry (as bones) humor saturates the text, especially when the ghosts are referred to by what is on their tombstones, as in, "He went down the hill at a run, a ten-year-old boy in a hurry, going so fast he almost tripped over Digby Poole (1795-1860, As I Am So Shall You Be), righting himself by effort of will."

The oldest tomb in Bod's cemetery is an ancient
barrow, which figures ominously in the plot.

The toddler, named Nobody Owens, grows up with spectral tutors and protectors. He learns to read by deciphering the tombstones. Some types of ghosts can leave the graveyard, and those bring him food. In fact, there are many kinds of ghosts and otherwise undead creatures looking out for Bod, as he is called, reminiscent of the Harry Potter stories. And some of them are on the lookout for the person/entity who killed Bod's family (Graveyard's Voldemort).

Graveyard stays pretty light, as Bod gets into and out of trouble. The chapters are funny in themselves, and actually charming, a word I don't use too often. Any fourth grader and up will enjoy them just as cool ghost stories.

However, quite subtly and unawares, Bod gathers knowledge that will help him protect himself when the murderer returns. It is subtle because I didn't realize it until the crisis occurred...it was not telegraphed. Bod collects specific knowledge of stories, languages of the dead, and sacred objects like amulets. The story does get a bit grim toward the end, as Bod and the ghosts cope with a group of attackers. The attackers are not treated gently or kindly.

The graveyard gates have kept Bod's enemies
out--but will it keep him in forever?

A major theme in this book is whether Bod will ever get to live outside the safety of the graveyard. Several times he seeks to stay forever, without really understanding what death is. In the end, he chooses to leave. This echoes wonderfully the developmental crises of adolescence (which some of us never get over)--the approach of independence and the avoidance thereof. Somehow, the child must feel both safe and strong to go forth, and must want to explore a wider world. Children thrown out without the sense of safety, strength, and curiosity will fail. The graveyard world is a security blanket; and Bod resists the measures taken to prepare him to leave, such as the education he receives.

I recommend this terrific book. The language is not difficult (except for names). It is imaginative and interesting, fast-paced, at times ecstatic, and utterly accepting of death, which oddly bequeaths the joy in the book.

Graveyards

Since I've been researching family ancestry in the past few months, I feel an amazing affinity for graveyards. They are the holders of record, the names, the dates, the "daughter of," the "loving mother and wife," the "Grand Army of the Republic, 1864." If you can get to the stones before they weather away, they will give up great information, carefully hoarded information. Chuck Wallace and I met in a local graveyard the other day, to let our dogs roam (with poop bags ready, of course). This graveyard is so old that the graves are undecorated, tilted, worn. Still, Chuck took me to his favorite stone--one in which a misspelled word is carefully repaired by the carver. What a crisis it must have been in a time of grief to discover this egregious and disrespectful error! Who was responsible for getting it fixed? Was the stone carver ever after shunned?

Liz I is a primary marker of history for me. Was
an ancestor alive before, during, or after her
reign? Was the ancestor a contemporary of
William Shakespeare?

In genealogy, finding the grave marker is a major discovery. It makes the ancestor physically real, even as it marks his or her passage into physical non-reality. I have followed the lives and deaths of so many ancestors. The simple data says so much--the historical context of the birth and death years: what was happening at that time? Was she born in England during the reign of Elizabeth I? Did he die before or after Columbus arrived in the Americas? Many of my forebears were English Puritans, arriving in America between 1620 and 1650, a time of religious upheaval and persecution in England. Many others migrated to Ohio from the east between 1780 and 1820, probably claiming land grants as payment for service in the American Revolution.

A map of a cemetery

Birth records are evocative. How many children did the women have? How many of the children lived less that five years? Did a woman have children every year? How old was she when she married? How old was her husband? What kind of life was that?

Fortunately (except for those of you bored stiff by this genealogy stuff), graveyards are quite well-documented. People have marked locations and copied off information. We DO know where the bodies are buried! And me? I don't know. Now that cremation is getting more popular, it is likely that my final resting place will be unmarked. I will end up like one of Gaiman's characters, unsanctified, forgotten. The only beauty will be that I will not be around to find out!

Ancestry Insanity

William de Tracy, from the reign of Henry II, burst into Canterbury Cathedral with some fellow knights and smote Becket upon the head. It took several blows to end his life. De Tracy, a grandson of William the Conqueror, was part of the great religious back-and-forth--don't give Rome too much power, but don't give the English people too much power either. Challenge the authority of the Pope, but never the authority of the King. De Tracy was exiled to the Holy Land and lived out his life in penance. Or, he died on the way there, perhaps of leprosy. Or, he went as far as Rome and then returned quietly to live out his life in the English countryside.

Youngest son Henry was left landless when his father William died. One of his brothers got control of lands in Brittany and the other got England. Instead of relishing their good fortune, the older brothers immediately went to war against each other, leaving Henry on the sidelines. But not for long. Henry played his brothers against each other until he was the only one left, crowned Henry I, King of England. For the rest of his life he struggled to keep his quilt-pieced kingdom together.

Henry's grandpapa was William the Conqueror, who invaded England from France in 1066, defeated them at the Battle of Hastings, and established a Frenchified aristocracy. He is known for ordering the recording of land ownership in great detail, giving us a rich picture of medieval life in England. This collection is called The Domesday Book.

William the Conqueror was supported in his ambitions by Henry I, King of France. Henry's support was controversial because William was illegitimate. Henry had a hard time holding onto his lands and gladly took W the C's assistance. Henry I's son was Phillip I of France. Philip I ended up in many struggles with Henry II or England, who was behind the murder of Becket. So, we're back at the top of the page!



What do these ancients have to do with me? I think I'm related to them. Ancestry.com has become my new BFF. On a whim, I signed up for a month-long trial. Within hours, I was obsessed. I typed every name I knew among my grandparents and great-grandparents into a easy template and POP! the hints started coming. Just like the TV commercial says, green leaves started sprouting on the branches of my tree.

I was aided by a family history on my dad's side of the family and by the funeral book of my maternal grandmother on the other. The family tree grew rapidly and with a fair amount of accuracy. I could match new entries with names, birth and death dates, census records of location, names of sons and daughters and parents. Only in one branch of the family have I failed to get past the great-grandparents. (And even then, I discovered their names and places of residence--but no further genealogical information.)

At the end of my third week on Ancestry.com, I'm in the 900s on several branches of the tree. As I approached the 1100s and saw that the names were getting more and more French while the death locations were still English, I thought--aha, we're Normans. And shortly after that, I discovered my family's connection to the early Henrys and to William the Conqueror. I am especially tickled because one of my favorite actors, Peter O'Toole, played both of the Henrys in wonderful movies which I knew well.

The farther back in time I go, the less reliable I feel my results are. It's easy to get confused and put someone in as a parent who was born later than the child, for example. Also, multiple spouses make me crazy and sometimes the same children are listed under each spouse. It's messy. So, maybe I'm not related to these royal personages at all. But I'm sure enjoying the thought of it.

My month-long subscription to Ancestry.com cost $20, a huge bargain. I enjoy all of the "way back" stuff, but it's icing on the cake. The real importance to me is having a record for my niece, grandniece, nephews, and any children they have. The family records are handwritten and confusing. People on page 3 get continued on page 27 and 28 and it's easy to get confused. With Ancestry, you can zoom through the family tree by grabbing the screen and pulling it across. It's all right in front of me.


I'm struggling with the Dickerson side of the family. And I can't get the Grow/Groves people to open up either. I think both of them probably came from England. In its one stingy move, Ancestry charges a premium for British records, so I'm not able to search. Still, I have them back to the middle of the 1700s--that's pretty cool.

My conclusion is that I am distinctly of exclusively Northern European heritage. The countries of birth of my ancestors have been confined to England, Scotland, Wales, Ireland, Germany, Netherlands, and France. It's a pretty contained geographic area. Most branches of my family were in the Americas by the 1700s and in Ohio by the early 1800s. So, I'm an Ohioan of Northern European extraction. I feel the royalty surging through my veins now, and even if not royalty, the blood of hundreds of ancestors who in some way shaped who I am.

Take the plunge on Ancestry.com. Take the information and take the fun!