13 ways of looking at the novel
So I've been reading 13 Ways of Looking at the Novel by Jane Smiley. The first twelve ways are explored in twelve essays, which were sometimes heavy going (the art of the novel, the psychology of the novel, the history of the novel, etc.) The thirteenth way is explored in mini-essays on each of a hundred books. Anyway, this bit about Moby Dick, which I hated, seemed spot on:
"Other novels, of course, I liked very much and I remember them fondly every day or two in the ongoing flow of mental images that constitutes my inner life. But even though I had no argument with Moby Dick and felt as though I was enjoying it and appreciating it without truly loving it, very little lingers, and I rarely think about it. Is this only because the concerns of the novel are extremely masculine and I don't really care about them? Is it because the style seemed heavy and ornate to me and didn't really communicate much about the psychology of the characters even though I wanted it to? Is it because the characters don't relate to one another in a way that I intuitively comprehend? More important, do I need to read it again and try to get more out of it? That strikes me as possible but not likely, rather like going out on a date with someone who was okay but not compelling the first time." (p. 373, emphasis added.)
YES.
On the other hand, does anyone think this interpretation of The Great Gatsby is needlessly harsh?
"This is a vividly written novel of a very young man (Fitzgerald was twenty-nine when it was published). It is not the wisdom of the ages. All the qualities of youth are present in the novel - snap judgments about others, overblown emotions, sharp observations about surfaces, self-doubt, self-hatred, and a lack of insight into women - plus considerable promise, of course - but I don't think it is careful enough, wise enough, or well enough thought through to be a masterpiece." (p. 449.)
Come on, now.
"Other novels, of course, I liked very much and I remember them fondly every day or two in the ongoing flow of mental images that constitutes my inner life. But even though I had no argument with Moby Dick and felt as though I was enjoying it and appreciating it without truly loving it, very little lingers, and I rarely think about it. Is this only because the concerns of the novel are extremely masculine and I don't really care about them? Is it because the style seemed heavy and ornate to me and didn't really communicate much about the psychology of the characters even though I wanted it to? Is it because the characters don't relate to one another in a way that I intuitively comprehend? More important, do I need to read it again and try to get more out of it? That strikes me as possible but not likely, rather like going out on a date with someone who was okay but not compelling the first time." (p. 373, emphasis added.)
YES.
On the other hand, does anyone think this interpretation of The Great Gatsby is needlessly harsh?
"This is a vividly written novel of a very young man (Fitzgerald was twenty-nine when it was published). It is not the wisdom of the ages. All the qualities of youth are present in the novel - snap judgments about others, overblown emotions, sharp observations about surfaces, self-doubt, self-hatred, and a lack of insight into women - plus considerable promise, of course - but I don't think it is careful enough, wise enough, or well enough thought through to be a masterpiece." (p. 449.)
Come on, now.
Comments
Like you, bearette, I disagree with the author's comment about Gatsby. I might agree if the author was talking about Fitzgerald's first novel, This Side of Paradise. But even This Side of Paradise had some fascinating and deep self-portrait in it that was way beyond the trivial musings of a young man.
It also occurs to me that different people are drawn to different books for different reasons. AL, my girlfriend in college, loved Anna Karenina. I haven't been able to get into it. It certainly wouldn't occur to me to justify my struggles with the book by saying that it's just a sub-par book; maybe AL got something out of it that I didn't.
el lugubre lector - hee, nice moniker ;) i loved AK, but i think it's more of a woman's book...and war & peace is more of a guy's book...my father-in-law loved the brothers karamazov, and d & i couldn't stand it...go figure.