Thursday, October 30, 2008

austen, byatt, and eckhart tolle

I thought I'd jot (type?) down some thoughts regarding some books I finished recently.

As a Jane Austen fan, I'm embarrassed to admit that I never read Persuasion until last month. I really enjoyed this book (much better than Mansfield Park), although I couldn't help being reminded that Jane Austen tends to use the same themes and character types in her novels. Sir Walter Elliot as the silly and ridiculous parent = Mrs. Bennett (Pride and Prejudice). Anne as the demure and sensible heroine = a mixture of Fanny (Mansfield Park) and Jane (P&P). Mr. Walter Elliot is exposed to be a man whose character is less-than-admirable, which = Mr. Wickham (P&P), Mr. Willoughby (Sense and Sensibility), and perhaps Mr. Crawford (Mansfield Park) too. And Lady Russell seems like a combination of Mrs. Weston (Emma) with a little of Lady Catherine De Bourgh's (P&P) pride.

I thought it was interesting to see Austen's own feminist sentiment reveal itself at the end of the novel. Anne and Captain Harville are debating whether men or women have the capacity to truly fall in love. Harville comments that all prose and poetry contain references to women being fickle, but then recognizes that these were all written by men. Anne agrees, "Yes, if you please, no reference to examples in books. Men have had advantage to us in telling their own story...the pen has been in their hands." I think that Austen was expressing her own frustration as a female writer through this conversation.

I don't think I would have read A New Earth on my own volition, but this was the book chosen for my book club. It took a while for me to get into this book, perhaps because I felt that Tolle's writing was sometimes laced with a slightly condescending tone. I did think he had some interesting points, though. For example, he argued that people get attached to material possessions because they project part of their personality or image onto those things. For example, I am attached to a really cute red purse. According to Tolle (and I agree with him), I am attached to this purse because I think it's cute, and thereby I consider myself to be cute when I'm using the purse. This point made me rethink my attachment to material goods - including all of my purses and shoes! There were several other interesting points in this book, but I don't know if I would ever read it again or recommend it to someone else.

I really enjoyed Byatt's Possession a lot, although a handful of things bothered me. This book is about two scholars of 19th century poetry who stumble upon love letters between two poets. One of these scholars, Maud Bailey, is a feminist professor who is a specialist of the poet Christabel La Motte. Roland Mitchell is the other scholar, who specializes in the poetry of Randolph Henry Ash. The book follows the discovery and research regarding these found letters, and it's absolutely fascinating. In regards to the unfolding of plot, climax, and resolution, I think this is one of the best books that I have read in a long time. Plus, the past year and a half of my life has been spent doing intensive research for my thesis, and I get excited when others make exciting discoveries in their research.

I really loved the last chapter of the book, but I had one issue with the second to last chapter (which involves most of the resolution of the plot). The two scholars, Roland and Maud, have begun to form an attachment to each other. In this chapter they are deciding what to do about their relationship, now that their adventure is ending. Roland says, "I'll take care of you, Maud." And, basically, that's the end of their story. I was kind of mad - doesn't Roland know that that phrase ("I'll take care of you") is the absolute last thing that a feminist scholar would like to hear a male say? I kept on reading, hoping that Maud would get mad too, but nothing else is written. Perhaps Maud wasn't the true feminist that her character seemed to be during the previous 400 pages?

Next books on the reading docket: The Poisonwood Bible by Barbara Kingsolver.
The Genius in the Design: Bernini, Borromini, and the Rivalry that Transformed Rome by Jake Morrissey.
Mila 18 by Leon Uris (I know nothing about this book - it's this month's choice for book club).
Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass (Douglass' famous autobiography).

12 comments:

Anonymous said...

Your description of Jane Austen's typical characters reminded me of Book-a-Minute's abridgement, The Collected Work of Jane Austen. I recommend reading other "abridgements" on the site as well, they're really funny.

Anonymous said...

Oops I forgot the link:

The Collected Work of Jane Austen

Anonymous said...

Ha ha! This is a great site Jon. Thanks for the link. I especially like the War and Peace and Scarlet Letter "abridgements."

Anonymous said...

hooray! i heart possession!

i think that there are two things going on with the ending:

The first has to do with the genre, which Byatt explicitly states is a romance. The generic conventions, which she plays with and analyzes but doesn't break, demand that the two get together at the end, and also project this sort of relationship, at least to an extent.

Secondly, throughout the entire work, Byatt is demonstration the freedoms and limitations inherent in both postmodernism and feminism. Nothing comes without a price in both stories; the 20th century characters think that they can avoid the complications, pitfalls, and tragedies of earlier times, but their credos fail to fulfill them completely. For Byatt, rigorously sticking with a postmodern understanding of literature essentially destroys both the text and the reader; similarly, feminism is not a satisfactory end in itself in the way it is packaged and sold by extreme feminists. The text does have meaning and aesthetic value beyond gender constructs and class conflict, meaning which exists independently of the ideology of the reader (and the writer), and extreme feminism--women don't need men (and vice versa)--or even the idea that we don't need relationships at all, is proven unsatisfactory for all sets of lovers. Maude doesn't put up a fight at the end because, in some deep way, she wants someone to say that s/he will take care of her, and accepting that does not deny her autonomy as a woman, or a human.

At least that's what I think.

Anonymous said...

Zillah, great comment. I did notice Byatt's commentaries on the limitations of postmodernism and feminism throughout the text, so I guess it is surprising that I was taken aback by the ending. And you're right, this book is a romance and still follows the convention of a romance, although Byatt does play with and analyze that convention.

There definitely is an interesting parallel between (feminists) Maud and Christabel La Motte. Christabel gave up her romance to focus on her poetry and she essentially died as an "old witch in a turret." On the other hand, Maud and Roland seem to want to find a balance between their two careers, which suggests a happier ending for those two than that of Ash and La Motte.

Anonymous said...

I have a really lovely copy of Persuasion given me by your mother oh, years and years ago, who said in the note she wrote on the frontspiece that it's her favorite Austen. I think Anne is the most stoic of Austen's heroines, but the least wry. I admire the characters and their enduring love (particularly after suffering through that awful vampire book), but miss the arch commentary other books provide first person. And yup, the caricatures of the Elliot family border on the painful.

Wouldn't you love to see the people in Austen's life who shaped these recurring characters in her novels?

As for Possession...I've never NEVER been able to get past how much I dislike both Christobel LaMotte (whom, I'm sure you already know, is almost verbatim based on Christina Rosetti) and RH Ash as writers. I always find Byatt's work better in retrospect than I do while I'm reading it (see Babel).

However, zillah's read of it as emblematic of the conflict between romanticism and postmodern feminism is riveting.

Almost I would read it again. Except I won't. Because? Fairy poetry!

Poisonwood Bible and Douglass are favorites of mine. Have fun!

Anonymous said...

re liking byatt's work better in retrospect, i completely understand. possession is really the only one i enjoyed reading, and even then i liked it much more the first time i read it than the second. byatt always leaves me with a sense of trying too hard: the biographer's tale seemed like a clumsy and pale rendition of pale fire, and i don't even like nabokov.

Anonymous said...

clumsy and weak rendition. i can't believe i repeated pale.

Anonymous said...

I enjoyed your post on the books you have read, plus the engaging dialogue after in your comments. You hang out with some good thinkers.

I can't resist saying that I hear the "I'll take care of you" with Vinnie of Queens' voice as he told Nathand and Sarah Jane that he could solve any NYC problem for them. Excellent.

Scott and I both loved Poisonwood. Douglass is enlightening and inspiring. Both are past book group choices with my friends, so I am reminded of lovely and lively discussions.
Mom/Gram/Annette

Anonymous said...

Persuasion is my favorite of Austen's works.

Anonymous said...

Here's some further thoughts on Possession that Zillah posted on her blog yesterday:

http://zillahsgin.blogspot.com/2008/10/habeo-habere.html

Anonymous said...

Can I be you when I grow up? You are so well spoken and intelligent :)