One Community, One Book
A Community Reading Project

Bel Canto Discussion Questions from The University of Iowa Center for Human Rights

  1. Bel Canto is about many things. Music is among them. Bel Canto holds up music—and by extension, the arts in general—as a powerful force that can break down barriers between disparate individuals. To what extent do you believe this to be true in real life? Is it possible that music (or art in general) could be a powerful force to break down barriers also between disparate groups of people? Have you had a personal experience that supports or contradicts these notions?
  2. Is there in any sense a fundamental right to beauty? What is the relationship, if any, of the arts to human rights? Is it possible for there to be any true advancement in the growth and spread of human rights without resort to the affective or intuitive as well as the cognitive that is in each of us?
  3. In answering the immediately foregoing cluster of questions, does it help to know that Article 19 of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights proclaims that "[e]veryone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression" and that Article 27 declares that "[e]veryone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits"? What do these provisions mean? What would you like them to mean?
  4. Authoritarian Fascist and Communist regimes are well known for their violations of articles 19 and 27 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, quoted in the preceding question. Can you think of any occasion when violations upon freedom of artistic expression have taken place in the United States? In the past? Recently? Is it ever appropriate for governments to impose limitations upon artistic expression? If so, when and why? If not, why not?
  5. It can be said that Bel Canto is also about terrorism. What is terrorism? Is it inherently violative of human rights? Why? Why not? In answering these questions, consider the widely accepted proposition that respect for others is the core value of all human rights.
  6. The hostage-takers in Bel Canto might be called terrorists by some, but they are treated with compassion and respect. The author, Ann Patchett, explores what has come to be known as "the Stockholm Syndrome," i.e., the phenomenon of sympathizing with one's tormentors (derived from a 1973 botched bank robbery at Kreditbanken in Stockholm, Sweden in which four hostages were held captive for six days but refused to turn against their captors). Do you believe Bel Canto is soft on terrorism? Why? Why not?
  7. In Bel Canto, the hostage-takers are taking action against a government they consider to be repressive and unjust, attempting to obtain the release of prisoners who they believe are being detained without just cause or due process. Does this motive or objective excuse them? Do human rights violations by governments justify violent retaliations against innocent people? Is there a more effective way to negotiate the release of unjustly held prisoners? How does the work of such organizations as Amnesty International come into play here?
  8. On December 16, 1773, in what has been called "one of the most effective pieces of political theater ever staged," approximately 150 Massachusetts colonialists, members of a political organization called "The Sons of Liberty," masquerading as Mohawk Indians and led by Samuel Adams, boarded three British ships in Boston harbor, broke open tea chests belonging to the British East India Company (a British Crown charter company), and heaved them into the sea—all in defiance of King George III and his colonial tax policies. John Adams, no fan of mob action, wrote of the dumping of the tea: "There is a dignity, a majesty, a sublimity, in this last effort of the patriots that I greatly admire." Were Samuel Adams and his men "terrorists" or "freedom fighters"? Are the hostage-takers in Bel Canto terrorists or freedom fighters? What is the difference between a "terrorist" and a "freedom fighter," if any?
  9. Is hostage-taking ever justified? Is terrorism ever justified? Are there instances when it is not possible to exhaust peaceful remedies or when the exhaustion of peaceful remedies would be known to be futile? Are there occasions when even incautious and reckless action against oppressive and/or tyrannical social structures seems justified? Can you think of any such situations in the world today? In the United States today?
  10. Several of the hostage-takers in Bel Canto are desperate for education and seek it from their captives. Taking their queue from Article 26 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, many people believe that education is a fundamental human right. Do you? Is their a right to education in the United States? Merely a statutory obligation to be educated? Is there a difference? In any event, would increased educational opportunity for the Bel Canto hostage-takers have made it less likely that some or all of them would have resorted to their at least initially terrorizing tactics?
  11. The host government in Bel Canto is hoping to persuade a Japanese business to build a factory in the country so as to provide jobs and improve the struggling economy. To what extent is economic equality a human right? To what extent should it be?
  12. Would the potential jobs created in the host country by the building of a factory by the Japanese company constitute a human rights triumph by improving the lot of some of the nations poor? Or would they constitute a human rights failure given that, judging by contemporary investment and trade practices, the jobs created would likely be low-wage, would not substantially elevate the economic standing of the country's workers, and potentially would cost the jobs of higher wage earners in another country?
  13. In Bel Canto, Carmen asks Gen if it would be so awful to remain in the Vice-President's mansion. She does so because she is leading a better life inside the home with the hostage-takers and other hostages than she would be doing were she in the hills with the rebels. The hostages do not see the mansion as a luxury. Does this aptly reflect the reality of Carmen's life and does this shed light and also understanding for the reasons the hostage-takers have taken over?
  14. It is clear throughout the novel that Mr. Hosokawa blames himself for the hostage-taking invasion because it was at his birthday party that hostages were taken. The question thus arises: who, if anyone, is to blame for the situation? Is Mr. Hosokawa correct to blame himself, are the hostage-takers to blame, or is there someone or something else ultimately to blame? If the latter, who or what?
  15. Does the story in Bel Canto promote religious intolerance? If so, against whom? Does it promote respect or disrespect for the Church as represented by the priest? If so, how? What is the role of the priest?
  16. On final analysis, Bel Canto is about many things: cultural differences, deceit, frustration, hate, helplessness, hopelessness, loyalty. But arguably most of all it is about love in at least the Greek agape sense (spiritual and selfless and a model for humanity). Do you agree? Why? Why not?
  17. In any event, is love in the compassionate spiritual sense a human right? In the compassionate sexual sense? In answering these questions, consider the possibility that love in either sense is the greatest expression of the core value of human rights: respect. Also note, however, that the right to love is nowhere explicitly mentioned in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Should it have been?
  18. Mahatma Gandhi once said: "They say 'means are after all [just] means.' I would say 'means are after all everything.' As the means, so the end. Violent means will give violent [results]. There is no wall of separation between means and ends. . . ." Does Gandhi's view supply a workable axiom applicable to the pursuit of human rights? Do you agree with Gandhi's objection to violence "because when [violence] appears to do good, the good is only temporary, the evil it does is permanent"? Does Bel Canto validate or contradict Gandhi?