logo

52 pages 1 hour read

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 3Chapter Summaries & Analyses

Book 3 Summary: “Starfish”

Daniel imagines his father’s thoughts as the date of his trial approaches. Paul looks to history for examples of others who have been accused of treason. At court, he is accompanied by his lawyer, Ascher. During the jury selection process, he scrutinizes the judge. Judge Hirsch is also Jewish and has ambitions of being appointed to the Supreme Court in the future. The prosecution is led by Howard Feuerman, nicknamed Red, who is a similar age to Paul and who is enjoying a “meteoric” rise in the legal world. As he watches the potential jurors, Paul cautions himself to remain calm. He reiterates the humanity of the jurors to himself as he and Rochelle pass reassuring notes to each other.

Daniel begins to imagine his mother’s thoughts during the same period. She is concerned for Paul as she meets with Ascher to talk about the trial. Ascher tries to reassure her, but Rochelle is worried about Paul’s weight loss and uncharacteristic resoluteness. Due to the unique nature of treason charges, she believes that their conviction is “foreordained.” The night before the beginning of the trial, she writes to Paul. Daniel includes her letter as part of his narrative. Rochelle describes her near-relief at the closeness of the trial, as they will at least be able to “sit at the same table” (234).

Rochelle describes how she met and fell in love with Paul. They met at a political rally in New York. At the time, both Rochelle and Paul were virgins. They were young, naïve, poor, and unified in their desire to change the world for the better. They were both committed to the Communist Party, even though Rochelle suspected that the unremarkable Paul would not have “a brilliant career in the revolution” (238). Daniel adds further letters, written by his parents during their trial. Paul believes that Feuerman is arrogant, and he notes the amount of Jewish people involved in the trial, accusing them of “self-hatred” for attacking him and his wife. Rochelle is in a women’s prison, where the other inmates treat her with respect. She tries to maintain her high standards of personal hygiene and spends her nights weeping, worried that the prison has already become her home. Daniel also attaches a memo about Mindish’s arrival in the United States written by Ascher.

Rochelle does not doubt that she and her husband will be found guilty. She fears that they will be condemned to death. She dislikes the people in the court and senses that this negative atmosphere will likely contribute to her fate. As she and Ascher talk about the idea of treason itself, she comes to realize that the courtroom norms are not being followed in this case, as this is considered “the worst possible crime” (245). All her speculation comes down to a single question, which she wants Mindish to answer. She needs to look him in the eye. She knows that she and Paul have been forever transformed by this experience, as have her children. If she were to return to her life, her family would not be able to go back to the way they were. Now, she remembers the cheap dentistry Mindish performed and the sexual way in which he examined her body. She remembers his boring wife and his uneventful existence. She views the freedom of her and her husband as just another liberty taken by Mindish. As he sits on the witness stand at the trial, she grows increasingly bitter about his constant lies. She hopes that Ascher, during the cross-examination, will be able to demonstrate that Mindish lived a double life as a spy.

Daniel includes a letter from Ascher to Robert Lewin. Ascher is growing pessimistic that the Isaacsons will be found guilty but believes that he can win the appeal. He fears that the Isaacsons are simply a symbol, a way for the American government to put the Soviet Union on trial. Ascher believes this is unfair to Paul and Rochelle. After the letter comes the confirmation of the inevitable: Paul and Rochelle Isaacson are found guilty of passing atomic secrets to the Soviet Union, or “something like that” (250).

Back in 1967, Daniel visits the mental health facility where Susan is being treated. The week before, he chased through the halls, furious that Dr. Duberstein prescribed shock therapy for Susan. Though Duberstein was not present, Daniel was assured that Susan would not be treated in this manner. Since it is nighttime, Daniel must sneak into the asylum. He enters Susan’s bedroom through a window. As he reflects on the occasional, complicated sexual thoughts he has had about his sister, he credits these thoughts to rage rather than actual desire. Susan is unconscious as he sits at her bedside. Daniel pins a poster of himself to the wall and then leaves.

Sometime later, Daniel meets with Jack P. Fein, a reporter for The New York Times who wrote a “reassessment piece” about Paul and Rochelle on the 10th anniversary of the execution. Fein tried to approach the outcome of the trial with distance from the fervor of the moment. Speaking to Daniel, Fein describes his belief that Paul and Rochelle were doomed, as they were not given any chance by the FBI or the Communist Party. They may not have been entirely innocent, Fein says, as many of their ideas were considered radical and subversive. This also made them easy targets. Fein suggests that they “acted guilty.” Later, Daniel meets Fanny, the widow of Ascher. For years, she has held the trial responsible for her husband’s early death. In Fanny’s experience, the Isaacsons were difficult. She believes their reluctance to call on certain people to testify on their behalf hampered their case.

Sometime later, Daniel visits his adoptive parents. He has been visiting them less recently, as each visit leaves him feeling conflicted. He has noticed how much they seem old and frayed in recent times. Daniel wants to talk to Robert about the case, though Lise is reluctant to discuss the matter. Issues regarding Susan’s legal guardianship and treatment and Fein’s article have caused issues in Daniel’s relationship with his adoptive parents. He feels the tension. Robert answers Daniel directly, assuring him that Paul and Rochelle did not hamper their case. He suggests that Fanny may simply be bitter about Ascher’s death. Robert believes that, if Isaacsons’ trial took place in 1967, they would fare better. Robert suggests that Paul and Rochelle’s reticent demeanor on the stand may have caused the prosecution to strive to make an example of them. Had Ascher attempted to prove that Mindish was innocent, rather than blaming him, then he might have succeeded in proving that the Isaacsons were also innocent. Mindish, Robert believes, was not a true believer in communism. Lise deplores “this family’s continuing desire for punishment” (272).

Daniel reflects on a review of his parents’ trial by the University of Virginia. The review suggests that there were “no less than seventeen abuses of due process” during the trial (276). Robert has since worked to have the verdict reversed, but Daniel is sick of the people who are seeking reforms based on his parents’ case. He has several library books which discuss the trial in contradictory ways. In his mind, he pictures a party where the guests are made up of people associated with the trial.

Next, he delves back into his childhood memories. Daniel remembers the time just after he and Susan ran away from the Shelter. They were taken to the Children’s Court, where Ascher defended them in front of Judge Greenblatt. The judge asked questions about their experience at the Shelter; Susan was too scared to respond. In the judge’s private chambers, Ascher reiterated that Paul and Rochelle wanted their children to stay in the Shelter until after the “long and frustrating trial” (282). Then, they hoped, the family could be reunited. They did not want the children to be sent to another family. Judge Greenblatt, however, wanted to do what was best for Daniel and Susan.

Daniel thinks about the Cold War and whether the United States could have ever negotiated with the Soviet Union for nuclear disarmament. After World War II, attempts at diplomacy seemed hollow. In the immediate aftermath of the war, the Americans moved quickly to push propaganda that demonized the Soviet Union as “aggressive, devious, untrustworthy, and brutally single-minded” (289). Though the United States was the dominant global superpower, the government felt the need to make the public afraid of the Soviets to preserve their hegemony.

Daniel recalls the first time that he and Susan visited their parents in prison. They were anxious about what they would see, and the guards confiscated the gifts they had brought. Daniel, uncomfortable with the long wait, demanded that the guards search him, claiming that he “might have a gun” (294). When he saw his mother, she seemed much older than him. For the first time, Daniel did not believe that his mother was beautiful. When she hugged him, he felt a difference. She “didn’t smell the same” (296). Daniel found himself massaging the truth about his life to make his mother feel better. When he let slip that he and Susan were being taken in by a family, she insisted that she was pleased. She said that she and Paul personally selected the Fischer family. As Susan and Daniel said goodbye to their mother, she told them that they would be reunited soon.

After Rochelle left the meeting room, Paul came in next. To Daniel, he seemed to have lost his mind. He showed his children a cigar box filled with dead bugs. He talked about how he trapped bugs to pass the time, inspecting them in detail. He also claimed to be writing a book, becoming so excited that Ascher needed to remind him to be calm. To Daniel, his father seemed to be adjusting to life in prison better than his mother. After this awkward first meeting, Daniel and Susan visited numerous times, including one time when Paul and Rochelle were allowed to receive their children together. This was the first time that they had all been in the same room since the arrest of Paul and Rochelle.

In 1967, Daniel, Phyllis, and baby Paul attend a protest in Washington, DC. Taking Susan’s car, Daniel feels as though he is driving into a dangerous, unknown land, like a “heart of darkness” (306). The protest is attended mostly by academics. The young men at the protest hand their draft cards to the Justice Department, signaling their refusal to fight in the Vietnam War. Worried that he will feel like a fraud, Daniel proudly declares his name to be Daniel Isaacson. The protest continues the following day when a far larger crowd gathers at the Lincoln Memorial. Daniel hopes to see Artie Sternlicht at the protest but does not spot him. Sensing that the protest may turn violent in the evening, he tells Phyllis to take the baby back to their accommodations. She reluctantly agrees. At night, the protest begins to dissipate. As Daniel predicted, it turns violent. Daniel is caught in the fighting between protestors and the police. He is hurt and then thrown in jail. Later, he learns that Artie was beaten so badly by the police that he needed to go to the hospital. Daniel pays a fine and leaves jail. Phyllis is horrified by his wounds, but he assures her that he will be fine, as being a revolutionary in their era is a lot easier than before. 

Book 3 Analysis

For a significant portion of Book 3, Daniel narrates his parents’ thoughts as they experience prison. Like so much in the novel, these passages are not based on objective truth. Rather, Daniel reenacts their incarceration to try to understand and reassure himself. As such, their narration provides a mirror of Daniel’s own character. Rochelle’s impression that her husband is losing too much weight, for example, hints at Daniel’s hope that his parents remained quietly affectionate toward one another even during this difficult time. Daniel’s longtime loathing of Mindish also manifests in his mother’s desire to stare Mindish in the eye. This becomes evident in the later stages of the book, as Daniel seeks out Mindish to look him in the eye to obtain answers to questions that he cannot reasonably put into words. Daniel cedes narrative space to his parents’ perspective but, in doing so, simply creates new voices for his own subconscious.

The different points at which Paul, Ascher, and Rochelle recognize the inevitability of Paul and Rochelle’s conviction and execution illustrate the Ideological Tensions driving the trial, as well as those that exist between the three of them despite their shared political beliefs. Ever the idealist, Paul believes that he will be able to convince the world not only of his innocence but of the necessity of a communist revolution. The more practical Ascher believes that he will lose the case but win the appeal. Rochelle, meanwhile, remains the most pragmatic and cynical character in the novel. Unlike her husband, whose perception of events is shaped by his faith in the truth of his ideology, or Ascher, who believes he can shape what happens through his skill as a lawyer, Rochelle pays close attention to the events unfolding around her. She senses the mood of the times and knows that she and her husband cannot be allowed to live, whether they are guilty or not. Her pragmatism is in line with her political convictions, which are driven by her material conditions and her belief in equality. She understands, as Paul and Ascher cannot, that the government must make an example of her, and that it will use the technicalities of the law to accomplish this. Rochelle recognizes that the trial is not about guilt or innocence, or even national security, but about winning a battle in the ideological war between communism and capitalism. The growing gap between Rochelle’s perception of the situation and Paul’s exposes the tensions between their beliefs that have existed throughout their relationship, exposing the fact that even those working toward the same political ends often believe very different things. The irony of this is that Daniel, who is revisiting the case from an academic perspective, can neither fully recognize this nor appreciate the accuracy of his mother’s pessimism. Even knowing that she was executed by the state as she predicted, Daniel cannot accomplish his mother’s level of pragmatic understanding.

In Book 3, Daniel’s Generational Trauma manifests in a new pathology: incestuous thoughts about his sister Susan. Throughout the novel, Daniel catches himself sexualizing his sister. Daniel also says that Susan often flirted with him as they both came to grips with their emergent sexuality, though they never acted upon their sexual tension. As adults, they both have problems with sexual relationships; Daniel abuses his wife, while Susan has a string of unsatisfying sexual encounters. Daniel struggles to understand his feelings toward his sister, wondering if he has confused his rage for passion. Yet the novel also suggests that their feelings are an expression of their trauma born of their need to be understood and loved. They are the children of people who were executed by the state. They were treated as the aristocracy of a movement they did not understand, while also being abused by the media and shifted between temporary homes. Their relationship is filtered through the lens of what happened to their parents, meaning that only Susan and Daniel are fully capable of understanding what they went through. Yet they also resent each other for the pain they could not rescue each other from. Their desire for comfort and affection takes an occasionally incestuous dimension as they struggle to find themselves in a world in which no one else can truly empathize with them.

Finally, Book 3 solidifies the connections between Protest and Performance and power and pain. Paul and Rochelle’s trial, as Rochelle recognizes, is more a performance of ideological state power than an exercise in justice. However they might protest the outcome, it was always going to end with the death of the “traitors” because its purpose was to demonstrate the power of the state over its ideological enemies. Similarly, when Daniel attends the protest in Washington, DC, he recognizes that it will inevitably end in the state asserting its power violently over the protesters. The actual protest consists mainly of performative actions, such as turning in draft cards; Daniel participates, knowing that his gesture is empty since he cannot serve in the military. Eventually, as Daniel foresaw, the police move in to arrest and beat protesters into compliance. The novel leaves it unclear whether the protest will bring about any meaningful change, but it does reaffirm the interconnections of protest, performance, and suffering at the hands of state power for Daniel, as well as his conviction that modern protest is empty and impotent.

blurred text
blurred text
blurred text
blurred text
Unlock IconUnlock all 52 pages of this Study Guide

Plus, gain access to 8,800+ more expert-written Study Guides.

Including features:

+ Mobile App
+ Printable PDF
+ Literary AI Tools