Well, I find parts of this book interesting, with funny comments and then there are parts that make me so horribly uncomfortable I find it difficult to finish. But here we are to talk about it anyway.
This book, like so many others we’ve read this semester, is often so vague that it almost makes the point but not quite. What I mean is that these novels all seem to skirt around the issues they are trying to address. It’s like they can never really just come out and say what they want to say. Instead they insinuate and talk in circles leaving the reader to have to “connect the dots” so to speak. The trouble with this is that sometimes as a reader, you’re not completely sure you’re getting the right message. At least that’s my problem.
Looking at the question Colleen posted regarding the quote,
"This is what shame does. This is the anatomy and mechanism of a family--a whole fucking country--drowning in shame” (Enright p. 168).
I read and re-read this page, this chapter and the one prior trying to fully understand what the major issues were. What I got out of it was really the issues of drinking, molestation, and then the complete lack of acknowledgement that there was an issue. To me it sounds like Veronica is talking about the problems with sex and molestation. Especially in the quote at the end of chapter 25,
“-if I hadn’t been listening to the radio, and reading the paper, and hearing about what went on in schools and churches and in people’s homes. It went on slap-bang in front of me and still I did not realize it. And for this, I am very sorry too” (Enright p. 172-173).
It’s this horrific problem that is going on right in front of everyone that seems to go unnoticed, but really just goes on ignored. People don’t talk about it, don’t try to fix it; they simply feel ashamed, disgusted, and often drink their way around the real issues.
Again I think this whole situation of not acknowledging the problems can be seen in many of the books we’ve read so far. In “Carmilla” Laura and her father couldn’t seem to acknowledge that the problem was Mircalla until it was almost too late. In “Dorian Gray”, just about everyone was in denial of the circumstances. In “Castle Rackrent”, the Rackrent’s just ignored their problems hoping they would disappear and even in discussing Edgeworth herself, she seemed to struggle with acknowledging her own status acting like a wolf in sheep’s clothing. It’s really an issue of turning a blind eye to a situation that isn’t going to go away without being addressed. Perhaps there is even some correlation between that concept and the overall and ongoing issues between England and Ireland; the loyalists and the unionists. Pretending there isn’t an issue or that there never was a problem does NOT make the situation better.
Not sure if this all makes sense, but just some of my ideas on this topic.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Hey CD,
ReplyDeleteI am relieved to see that I was not the only one to find that the novel was ‘vague.’ I really liked what you said in the passage, “Instead they insinuate and talk in circles leaving the reader to have to “connect the dots” so to speak. The trouble with this is that sometimes as a reader, you’re not completely sure you’re getting the right message.” You did a really good job of describing what I found so infuriating about the novel. After reading the novel I was unsure of how to feel and what exactly happened, so especially in my case I had difficulty understanding the message of the novel.
I was glad to see that you decided to look into the quote that Colleen out on her blog, "This is what shame does. This is the anatomy and mechanism of a family--a whole fucking country--drowning in shame” (168). When I read this on her blog and then in the book, I was very confused as to what she was referring to, like everything else in the book it seemed very vague. Although it still seems a little ambiguous, what you said about her referring to sex and molestation does make sense, especially when you look at the part of the quote that talks about the whole country drowning in shame. Molestation in the church in Ireland was and probably still is a problem in Ireland.
It was really cool how you were able to relate the problem in the novel about ignoring or overlooking issues to the other novels that we have read in this class. It is especially apparent in Castle Rackrent and Thady’s tendency to ignore all of the destructive behavior that his masters exhibited.
Ceol Agus Craic,
ReplyDeleteI'm glad that you pointed out the similarities to the other novels that we've read. I was just beginning to notice that as well, so its nice to know I'm not the only one who saw it. However so many of the traits that we've all noticed exist vastly outside of just Ireland. We're just noticing the similarities between these specific novels, because they are a small selection, which I'm pretty sure wasn't by complete coincidence.
I think another part of what is going on in these stories is the keeping up of appearances. Things are less like that now, but its often more important to put up a truly strong front than to acknowledge any type of turmoil growing beneath the surface. This is a trait that I've noticed is much more common in European countries and older America.
WS
CD-I have to agree with you on how the book was uncomfortable to read at times. And yes, I can see how you thought it was vague. With the unknowing of what is real in the novel and what is made up, it can take on that vagueness and even gives us an unpleasant opinion of the novel, because we don’t exactly know what is going on and humans always like to know what’s going on—it’s in our nature. So that can contribute to some people’s opinions on the novel. For me, it wasn’t my favorite novel that we have read yet this semester, but I prefer it to some of the other ones we have read.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I kind of like the idea of “connecting the dots.” I like using my mind to come up with what I think the novel is trying to get at. But then again, sometimes I can’t stand it. It’s like cliffhangers—I hate them even though I have the freedom as a reader to come up with an ending on my own, I always want to know the truth or what the right ending in the author’s mind was. But that’s part of why I love reading books. I love to be abstract and think about how the author wanted the novel that I’m reading portrayed; I love to think about how she wanted the reader to figure it out. It’s like a puzzle, or connect the dots, but it’s so much more fun that way. At least, for me : )
"It’s this horrific problem that is going on right in front of everyone that seems to go unnoticed, but really just goes on ignored. People don’t talk about it, don’t try to fix it; they simply feel ashamed, disgusted, and often drink their way around the real issues."
ReplyDeleteI think you've really touched on a big theme in a lot of these novels. Think way back to the original David Lloyd essay we read and the figure of the subaltern who cannot "speak" but is often "spoken for" by others. It does seem that in the Irish novel there is a "voice" or a story that longs to break through the static of forced complacency, and I do think that in Enright's novel the "story" of sexual abuse becomes an extension of this theme. As you described in another blog about your personal experience with abuse, no one wants to believe you. It's almost as if it becomes an "inconvenience" to everyone else to know the truth. It's much, much easier to walk around and pretend that everything is fine than to face the corruption underneath all the lies. I know I shouldn't make sweeping generalizations about Irish culture, but I wonder if this way of being in the world is historically rooted in colonialism and oppression. It was "easier," in a way to pretend that you were a docile servant, forget about your starving babies, your alcoholic husband than to actually deal with these very real problems. Liberation from England probably made it even worse in the sense that the Irish had to "pretend" that everything was "grand" in the Free State since the British had gone...but we know, from reading authors such as McCabe and Enright, that this was certainly not the case.