Paul’s comment > Likes and Comments
3 likes · Like
Generally with you on that, Paul, but the qualifying "Cromwell" didn't bother me unduly. In fact the device, in retrospect, somehow insinuated me into the time and place in Wolf Hall, but confirmed I was already there in the sequel.
I completely agree with you, Paul. I don't think serious literature should be comfortable, by definition it's supposed to draw you up short and even disturb you; how many times did I have to go back and reread a paragraph in "Wolf Hall" just because I had to figure out to whom the latest "he" referred to? I thought it was a stroke of genius, in terms of the psychological portrayal of Cromwell. It served to boldly outline him in the narrative; it threw his life and experiences into stark relief.
Great observations both. To he or not to he, I cannot wait for installment three.
Nicely put and I agree. "Bring Up the Bodies" should have stuck with the "he."
I agree, Paul. It took me a while to get used to it in Wolf Hall, but once I did, I felt as if the "conceit" was appropriate for the character. I, too, was disappointed in the prosaic, "he, Cromwell" in the sequel. But with both these books, I was not disappointed in her brilliant writing.
Paul, for what it's worth, I agree with you entirely.
I, too, love that the use of "he" puts Cromwell at the center of the story. There are, however, too many others whom Mantel refers to as "he" -- most disappointing aspect of the book, and especially frustrating for the portion of WOLF HALL that I listened to on CD... Couldn't refer back to the written page to try to suss out who "he" was.
I agree with Paul that adding "Cromwell" to the pronoun "he" was probably, in part, an editorial decision. At the same time, it seems appropriate to Cromwell's more established position within Henry's court. The narrative style in the sequel is also less disjointed and impressionistic than in "Wolf Hall," which, again, suggests that Cromwell has a much clearer sense of who he is. His reflections are those of a mature man in control of his thoughts and actions. In narrative theory, this kind of narrative style is called third-person focalization: there is a third person narrator but the narration is focused on and reflecting internally upon an individual character or figure. The use of the present tense adds to the effect of being inside Cromwell's mind. But Mantel is very subtle. In "Wolf Hall" there are passages where the third-person narrator and Cromwell seem to blend into each other. It's so subtle that the reader is not aware that the perspective may have shifted from Cromwell to the narrator. She is an excellent writer, techincally in the tradition of James Joyce, Virginia Woolf or Henry James. And she is applying those innovative narrative techniques to a very old-fashioned genre, formally speaking, the historical novel. Brave decision.
No, Jules, on the contrary - you nailed it. Because in the third instalment it will be "he, lord Cromwell". (I read this in an interview with Hilary Mantel which I can't currently find.)
back to top
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Colin
(new)
Aug 21, 2012 09:02AM
Generally with you on that, Paul, but the qualifying "Cromwell" didn't bother me unduly. In fact the device, in retrospect, somehow insinuated me into the time and place in Wolf Hall, but confirmed I was already there in the sequel.
reply
|
flag
I completely agree with you, Paul. I don't think serious literature should be comfortable, by definition it's supposed to draw you up short and even disturb you; how many times did I have to go back and reread a paragraph in "Wolf Hall" just because I had to figure out to whom the latest "he" referred to? I thought it was a stroke of genius, in terms of the psychological portrayal of Cromwell. It served to boldly outline him in the narrative; it threw his life and experiences into stark relief.
Great observations both. To he or not to he, I cannot wait for installment three.
Nicely put and I agree. "Bring Up the Bodies" should have stuck with the "he."
I agree, Paul. It took me a while to get used to it in Wolf Hall, but once I did, I felt as if the "conceit" was appropriate for the character. I, too, was disappointed in the prosaic, "he, Cromwell" in the sequel. But with both these books, I was not disappointed in her brilliant writing.
Paul, for what it's worth, I agree with you entirely.
I, too, love that the use of "he" puts Cromwell at the center of the story. There are, however, too many others whom Mantel refers to as "he" -- most disappointing aspect of the book, and especially frustrating for the portion of WOLF HALL that I listened to on CD... Couldn't refer back to the written page to try to suss out who "he" was.
I agree with Paul that adding "Cromwell" to the pronoun "he" was probably, in part, an editorial decision. At the same time, it seems appropriate to Cromwell's more established position within Henry's court. The narrative style in the sequel is also less disjointed and impressionistic than in "Wolf Hall," which, again, suggests that Cromwell has a much clearer sense of who he is. His reflections are those of a mature man in control of his thoughts and actions. In narrative theory, this kind of narrative style is called third-person focalization: there is a third person narrator but the narration is focused on and reflecting internally upon an individual character or figure. The use of the present tense adds to the effect of being inside Cromwell's mind. But Mantel is very subtle. In "Wolf Hall" there are passages where the third-person narrator and Cromwell seem to blend into each other. It's so subtle that the reader is not aware that the perspective may have shifted from Cromwell to the narrator. She is an excellent writer, techincally in the tradition of James Joyce, Virginia Woolf or Henry James. And she is applying those innovative narrative techniques to a very old-fashioned genre, formally speaking, the historical novel. Brave decision.
No, Jules, on the contrary - you nailed it. Because in the third instalment it will be "he, lord Cromwell". (I read this in an interview with Hilary Mantel which I can't currently find.)
