book discussion

Let's start discussing this on the 15th of February 2008.

Ruth and I, at least, are good to go already. We've been 'saving up spit' over at Paul's review of CB.

Right, Sherry. I know. I just couldn't restrain myself. I'll be here when we start our official discussion, and I'll bet Ginny will be, too.

R

I can't wait!

I've never done this before, but am looking forward to it having just read On Chesil Beach.

I too will want to throw in a few cents.

I'm ready -- I'm ready -- now I just have to keep thinking it over so I don't lose the whole thing!

Just checked out the discussion of this one under Paul's review. I am no longer concerned about how one engages in a public discussion of On Chesil Beach.

There are (something like) 148 pages of reviews. If you can find it again, could you post a link to Paul's review?

I had the same problem, Peter. Try this link:

http://www.goodreads.com/revie...

Okay, for all of you who have been eagerly awaiting the official beginning of the On Chesil Beach discussion..... on your mark, get set, go! (Yes, I know it's not the 15th yet here in Iowa, but it is on the east coast and I'm ready to head to bed and read for a while!)

As I said elsewhere, I haven't had time to re-read this, but there are some things that have stuck with me through the months since I read it last May. One was the feeling that this couple wrestled with the issues of sex and sexuality as if they lived decades earlier instead of the 1960s. It made me realize just how much my dating life was affected by the advent of the Pill (I was in high school in the late 60s/early 70s), but I don't think that was the only reason for the bride's repressed mindset.

I hope to get a chance to look at the book again over the weekend, so I'll leave my other comments until then and let the rest of you chime in.

Lynn

I didn't find this so odd as far as the inexperience and so on -- it is only -- what? 1962? (I was a high school senior that year) -- While there was a sea change taking place as far as sexual behaviors certainly -- I don't think the effect hit everywhere and everyone at once. All things depended upon where one was and how one was raised and what the family talked about or didn't and what expectations were. That's my caveat for my comments in the discussiion forthcoming. AND -- this isn't the carzy USofA -- it's prim and proper England -- and I have NO idea whether things were "behind" or "ahead" of the curve there then, but I'm sure there might be differences due to cultural, social differences -- yes, in the 60's.

It seemed to me that this couple had not been shy or backward in the time they spent together before the marriage and the disastrous wedding night -- so there's more to what happened than inhibitions me thinks. I'm looking forward to this one -- anxious to hear others ideas.

In 1962 I was married with a 4-year old. '50-'56 were my prowling years, so I predate the couple in this book. That's a preface to my saying that even then, back in the dark ages, nobody, NOBODY I knew was that dumb about sex.

Yes, we can make a case that wasn't really ignorance but a short in the girl's wiring that made her act the way she did. I can buy that. But IM made so much of her ignorance, that we have to figure that in, and I just can't buy that.

R

SPOILER, SPOILER.



I suspect that it wasn't ignorance so much as repression and trauma that were Florence's problems. There had to be something going on with her father. Remember how he made much of her younger sister, but totally ignored her? I think Florence had had a terrible experience and was basically in shock about anything to do with sex. Remember when she was trying to make a "joke" about killing her mother and marrying her father? I don't think that just flew into her head. I think she was trying to break the ice with Edward. Their real problem was not sex, but lack of communication. If she had confided in him about herself, I am positive things would have turned out differently. If HE had confided that he wasn't the all-too-experienced lover that she assumed he was, then SHE might have been more understanding of his urgency.

I listened to this in audiobook form, having read it earlier this year. There is a very enlightening interview with McEwan. I urge you all to listen to it, even if you don't listen to the whole book.

I thought the end of the book was so poignant and sad. The part that really got to me was Edward imagining the daughter he never had playing an instrument with her Alice band on. I just about lost it.

I agree, Sherry, that something had to have happened between Florence and her father when she was younger. I seem to remember some trips she made with him on a boat that made me very uneasy. I also agree that communication (or lack thereof) was their biggest problem. I kept thinking "say something to him!" and "tell her what you're thinking!".

Lynn

POSSIBLE SPOILER!!!!!!!!







Bingo -- as Ruth would say!

There was something fishy about Florence being her father's companion -- on business trips and those boat trips -- there is a lot we aren't aware of but McEwan certainly put out some bait -- are we supposed to take it and run with it -- drawing the conclusion as to the cause of Florence's problems on her wedding night -- and before obviously -- since it was clearly stated they had been into the "everything but" stage during their evenings/days together before they married? Or are we to take this to some less obvious conclusion -- which also leads to the disaster in the hotel and on the beach?

I’ll get to the sex eventually. I’ve read some interesting books about sex, and I think I may have something to contribute there.

I first wanted to say how much I admired this book. Ian McEwan must have labored mightily to make this prose appear so effortless. It must be hell to polish and polish a little gem like this with the sweat running down one’s back and then hear others characterize the finished product as a tiny piece of fluff unworthy of consideration for the Booker Prize. . . . . .I’ll bet that troubled Mr. McEwan for a whole couple of minutes at his massive Italian villa.

When he thought of her, it rather amazed him, that he had let that girl with her violin go. Now, of course, he saw that her self-effacing proposal was quite irrelevant. All she needed was the certainty of his love, and his reassurance that there was no hurry when a lifetime lay ahead of them. . . . .

When I had finished the previous page, this page, and the next page, I was shaken. If a male reader in his sixties who has also made any remotely comparable error reads this ending and is not deeply affected, he needs to be put down immediately because it’s over for him already anyway--painlessly if possible but put down in any event.

I cannot remember an ending that I liked better since the tea cup dropped on one side of the world was caught before it hit the floor on the other side of the world. There were no cool tricks like that here though. Just a straight ahead, painfully vivid evocation of bittersweet but powerful regret.

Glad you're discussing Flo's relationship with her father here. I was puzzled/intrigued by that as well. The part about them not talking much yet giving each other knowing glances, and then her Oedipus comment on the beach both set off alarms in my head.

And I thought the part about Edward imagining his daughter was touching too...though it never occurred to me that a guy might see this as fulfilling some kind of fantasy to be loved by two women at once.

Spoiler:

I'm currently at work and don't have the book with me (should have thought ahead), but isn't there a moment during the acutal "almost sex" scene in which Florence conveys, quite blatantly, a familiarity with sex ... and clearly links this familiarity with her father?

There are hints, throughout the book, that Florence is not simply "backward," but I seem to remember something rather direct in that bedroom scene.

Steve -- I am in total agreement with you on those pages -- that ending was/is wrenching -- and for Edward going forward carrying that wound in his being -- well -- just amazing writing as you say. I'm thinking this may end up as my favorite McEwan or at least tied for first on my list. This is very direct. Polished. Spare. -- and yet -- so much is buried in the spaces in that spare prose.

And -- refresh my mind as to the teacup thing -- it seems I've heard mention of this but have no peg to hang it on -- lost in the fog.

Leslie -- you may be right but I don't have a copy at all -- read the library's book and it is long gone back. I have this on my "to-buy" list though.

Dottie, I was referring to Kip and Hana in The English Patient. . . .I think. . . . the novel, not the $%&*in’ movie. That discussion was a long time ago now.

Mr. McEwan is not without sin, however. Comparing Florence’s facial structure to that of a “high-born squaw” brought me up a little short. To my way of reading that passage, that was clearly the narrator’s phrase and not Edward’s. Sweet Jesus, couldn’t we at least have considered some alternatives? I’m not arguing for political correctness here. My point is that not all high-born squaws are of a type such that this conveys any useful information to us. Perhaps my experience with high-born squaws is simply too limited. That is to say, my own particular high-born squaw sample may be too small.

Since my mind is on it now, that rivals Ondaatje’s comparison of the appearance of the English patient’s private parts to a seahorse. My rant about that here many years ago earned me a small crystal seahorse via UPS, which is still prominently on display in my living quarters.

Ditto Steve. The writing is just incredible. This was my intro to IM's writing so I am thrilled to be able to start reading his other work.

I was expecting something very different from this book based on what I read about it before beginning the novel myself. I had thought it was about the last "good girls don't enjoy sex" period in Western civilization and I might understand something more of that line of thinking after reading this book- but it turned out to tell me much more about Florence as an individual than that societal norm.

I also had the distinct impression that Florence had been sexually abused by her father- which did illuminate some deeply held (and still in force) beliefs that one does not disclose incestuous relationships to anyone- including one's husband.

The other part of the story that I found completely offsetting (and supports the idea that Florence was abused) was that this marriage was simply dissolved in 1962. This was prior to these things being so casual- and I wondered that the family of this young girl would just say "Oh sure... let's just get that little marriage thing taken care of" in that age.

Okay I'm home, and I've found the passage I wanted. In the immediate aftermath of Edward's (cough) eruption, McEwan says this about Florence: "And there was another element, far worse in its way and quite beyond her control, summoning memories she had long ago decided were not really hers." Within the same paragraph, the smell in the air is described as summoning "the stench of a shameful secret locked in musty confinement" (130-131).

It seems to me that the reason she comes across as almost idiotically ignorant and inexperienced is she has convinced herself that this is the case ... when in fact she has had quite a lot of "experience" and has worked very hard to repress it.

As for the easy dissolution of the marriage ... as long as a marriage has not been consummated, I believe the church has historically granted annulments with little fuss (as long as it is the man requesting it). I wasn't raised Catholic, though, so I'm not very informed on such things.

I guess my impression was that the marriage was consummated. Am I wrong? I think most couples need to figure a few things out when they begin a sexual relationship.

Marsha, you say, “. . .but it turned out to tell me much more about Florence as an individual than that societal norm.” I could not agree more. You are playing trump there. And it is for this very reason that I find Florence a far, far more interesting character than Edward. Her plumbing is not the only thing that is more complex than Edward’s.

Now, having said that, Marsha and Leslie, I am not yet ready to buy into the Paternal-Sexual-Abuse-of-Florence Theory. Leslie, those fascinating passages certainly indicate something happened. I’m just much less sure than everyone else as to what happened. Through the years the Constant Readers have been way too quick in my estimation to seize on some vague, possible earlier sexual abuse episode as a way to get a handle on a complex character. I’m not trying to be difficult. It’s a theory that has to be considered, but a little healthy skepticism is in order.

Oh, and Leslie is quite correct, I believe. This marriage was not consummated and therefore could have been annulled relatively easily even then. That’s one of the few things that I am pretty sure of.

With that I will be quiet and be a good “listener” for awhile. (I will get to the sex stuff later.)