Quote:
Originally Posted by issybird
I think the concept of a Victorian novel written from a 20th/21st century perspective is quite intriguing and has much to recommend it. Victorian novels are great reads in themselves and illuminating about the human condition. I cannot agree that the great themes relating to the human condition have been, or can be, done to death. Whether or not they're done successfully is a different matter.
The modern perspective is important because a novel that was just a pastiche wouldn't work, in part because of what we bring to it and in part because it would be impossible for the author successfully to immerse himself in the Victorian era to the entire exclusion of our own. The 19th century setting is important, though, and two reasons in particular occur to me. Part of it is the plottiness which requires length and which modern novels of the high-concept variety don't lend themselves to. And part of it, frankly, is the lack of technology. Railroads, steamships and a reliable post are about the extent of it; even the telegram is pushing things a bit. It's akin to writing golden age mysteries in the age of cellphones. No classic plot would stand up to that.
I have mixed feelings about "lessons" from literature. Mostly I just want a good story. Part of that is accuracy and insight into the human condition which can enrich one's understanding, but once I'm supposed to be learning something my eyes glaze over. Didacticism is to be avoided at all costs.
|
Insightful comments. I did not express my criticisms well. I agree that great themes relating to the "human condition" cannot be done to death objectively. Subjectively is a different matter. Perhaps I would have found more to engage me in this book had I been much younger and less widely read. Personally I simply found nothing new or interesting to me in Atwood's treatment of these themes and in the book generally.
I feel somewhat hypocritical in relation to my lessons comments, which did not come out as I intended. I have often posted that I simply want a good read, and my eyes too glaze over if I am expected to be taking lessons from a book. The point I intended to make was simply that I personally found little in this book to engage me. I found it overall a rather pointless "re-mix".
Nevertheless I finished the book. I did not dislike it, and have read far worse. But to me it was simply mediocre.
PS: @gmw. I just read your last post which expressed the points I wanted to make far better than I. I did find the whole thing pointless. And yes, perhaps it was at least partly because she tried so hard to stay on the fence. Which for me just didn't work.