21st Century Literature discussion
2014 Book Discussions
>
The Goldfinch - Part V (January 2014)
date
newest »
newest »
In the question for Part I, we considered whether Theo "stole" the painting. I did not think he did then and I don't think he did now. He did not know how to give it up without getting into trouble but I do not think he ever really thought he was doing other than protecting it -- certainly from the aftermath of the explosion and then from his father. Ultimately, the return of the picture became his priority. In effect, the painting saved him from becoming his father and running away by committing suicide (for me, his father committed suicide). If he committed suicide, how could the painting be recovered?Theo's mom, especially, and Pippa were also important factors in Theo's decision not to kill himself. If Theo's mom had not appeared to him in that dream in Amsterdam, I think he was lost. I think the appearance eased his guilt, especially when he thought of her being able to help Andy when he died.
I think Pippa's explanation to Theo of why she thought they could not be a couple really caused him to think. That may be when he first truly realized he, like she, had PTSD. Pippa seemed to be doing a better job of coping but she was probably as bad off as he was.
However, Theo would have been lost post-Las Vegas but for Hobie. Ultimately, he was, I think, the living person who saved Theo. Hobie is kindness personified and that kindness kept Theo alive.
Mod
Ultimately, I think Theo did trust his heart. He loved his mother, Pippa, Hobie, and Boris. And through that love, he did a fairly decent job of finally finding a way to live honorably, despite his belief that "life is catastrophe." (page 767) I like Theo's belief that it makes sense to go on living even knowing that "we all lose everything that matters in the end" because "it's possible to play it [life] with a kind of joy." (page 768)
Linda, I think there are some great observations there, about Pippa's comments to him, and about some of the thinking around the time he was considering killing himself. I have actually now started to question whether Theo's intentions can be construed as him not stealing the painting. Stealing it with good reason, and not for personal gain, perhaps, but however 'good' the act, I wonder if it can be excused from the label theft. I doubt the owners would say so. I think we are well-disposed towards Theo and giving him the benefit of the doubt. For instance, I wonder what we might think if somebody suggested that Boris did not steal the painting from Theo? He also had what were to him good motives.
Casceil, I think your comments are spot on. We see the bad side of Theo's Dad. A story told from his point of view might be very different even if covering the same events. Addiction can make us into horrible people, at times.I think the way Theo framed the question of trusting his heart was looking back over his history of self-destructiveness, which his heart led him into (it certainly wasn't his head!). But at the same time he perhaps doesn't see his own good side, the goodness he displayed to those who needed it, and his need not to have the painting lost forever to all.
I have to say I identify very closely with Theo. I too have struggled with some very deep character flaws that have meant that following my heart has harmed myself and those around me. But like Theo I think I have a deep core of goodness that will not allow me to rest for too long when I feel I have done wrong. I differ from him in his nihilism; I have never been through things as traumatic as he.
I found the conclusion very satisfying because, without giving too many prepackaged, neat answers, it suggests that there can be some kind of redemption for those of us who have danced a self-destructive dance on the urging of our instincts and our quest to find out who we are, that dancing too close to the fire does not mean being consumed, especially when our basic goodness to those around us has meant that they watch out for us, and care about us.
Casceil wrote: "I found the conclusion very satisfying...."Hmmm! I really am going to have to get to this novel. (Although Americanah has a stricter deadline tied to it in my life right now, and I would like to be able to participate with the The Flamethrowers discussion while it is still happening.) The "Hmmm!" is my reaction to contrasting your response to the conclusion to the one of a f2f BC fellow reader (actually a gal, and one of our wider-ranging readers) whose comment was along the lines of "All that, for this?" (We were discussing whether to make it a club read.) The curiosity factor mounts!
Mod
Terry wrote: "I have actually now started to question whether Theo's intentions can be construed as him not stealing the painting. Stealing it with good reason, and not for personal gain, perhaps, but however 'good' the act, I wonder if it can be excused from the label theft. I doubt the owners would say so. I think we are well-disposed towards Theo and giving him the benefit of the doubt. For instance, I wonder what we might think if somebody suggested that Boris did not steal the painting from Theo? He also had what were to him good motives."From a legal standpoint, Theo probably would be considered to have stolen the painting, especially since he did not return it in any reasonable period. But, putting the legal niceties aside, I stand by my conclusion that Theo did not steal the painting, although it is not long before Theo realizes that he will be considered to have stolen it because he has not told anyone he has it. Now Boris's intent is more suspect! Boris steals from everyone and admits it.
What were people's thoughts on finishing such a long book? Were you glad it was over? Did you want to go back and read it all again?
Terry wrote: "What were people's thoughts on finishing such a long book? Were you glad it was over? Did you want to go back and read it all again?"Well, I did not want to go back and read it all again, but that is something I very rarely do. Was I glad it was over is a harder question. I enjoyed reading it and found it to be hard to put down, as I wanted to know what was going to happen. So I was glad to reach the end to find out how Theo was going to move on. And as I think about it, I am satisfied and do not need to know more. Even though there are many things that were not resolved and people I would like to know more about - how long can Boris survive? How will the future treat Pippa? etc. - I am fine with not knowing and being able to imagine what might happen as Theo and those he knows continue their journeys.
Mod
Interesting what you say about the anxiety Casceil. I felt that too; I think it did even make its way into my dreams. It's a very interesting question when we start to think about when we can admire something that makes us uncomfortable. It shows skill, obviously, but is it what we want?For me, while I almost never think of starting over, I do sometimes wish there were more, even with very long books (after 1400 pages of A Suitable Boy I definitely wanted more). Here, I felt it was just the right length, and that things were resolved as far as I would like them to be.
I can't say I found the book intense at all but It did evoke various emotions for me. I was satisfied with the ending, mostly. An unfulfilling ending would have soured the entire book. I would happily read a sequel that followed an older Theo, filled us in on the Barbours and Hobie. Of course, there must be more adventure in store with Boris. I have wondered if The Goldfinch will become a contemporary classic at some point. Perhaps I am naive in that thought, however.
Sue wrote: "...I have wondered if The Goldfinch will become a contemporary classic at some point. Perhaps I am naive in that thought, however. ..."Sue -- are you willing to comment on at least some of the characteristics that take you to that possibility?
@Lily. For me a classic ranks as literature; with inherent messages, an artistic quality to it that surpasses the average novel, noteworthy writing, and multiple "arts" represented. A classic withstands the test of time and represents the period of time within which it was written. In this case, contemporary. It has broad appeal. Very few of the many novels written and published ever reach this status and only time will tell if the English teachers of our great-great grandchildren will be requiring The Goldfinch to be read and also studied. Studied not only as a literary classic but for the art and contemporary slice of life and time period it documents and preserves.
Sue, great criteria. Basicallly makes it impossible to know, but permits us to make predictions. Certainly few predicted Moby Dick as a classic! The exercise is rather like enermerating the criteria for Great American novel, as we have touched on in this month's discussion on the great American novel.
Sue wrote: "@Lily. For me a classic ranks as literature; with inherent messages, an artistic quality to it that surpasses the average novel, noteworthy writing, and multiple "arts" represented. A classic withs..."Sue -- thanks for taking the time to respond to my perhaps somewhat presumptuous question! I am still looking forward to reading The Goldfinch. As I read, I will think about what you have indicated as being the attributes TGF possesses that place it above the ordinary -- inherent messages, artistic quality, noteworthy writing, multiple "arts" represented, contemporary slice of life for the time period it documents and preserves.
Incidentally, a trivia bit I encountered somewhere is that one of the best (easiest?) paths for a book to become a classic is for it to be adopted into educational curricula. I don't totally repeat that as cynicism. [g]
Sue, your criteria is excellent. I think the goldfinch does "preserve a slice of life" and one that has yet to be very well documented in literature ( at least that I've read). It is true that only time will tell and it perhaps may be very dependent on the selections of English teachers of the future! It's been many years since I've read Catcher and The Rye, but for some reason The Goldfinch strikes me as a novel that would fit well into the curriculum that reads Catcher and The Rye. On another note, I was kind of disappointed by the ending! I loved the rest of the book so much and the ending felt rushed and incomplete. The characters in the last two parts seemed very underdeveloped to me and I think this detracted from my enjoyment of part V.
Shay, Linda, Sue -- is it possible to articulate the "inherent messages" in The Goldfinch? Or has this discussion already done so and I just need to read the book to understand?(I'm one of those people who has a hard time identifying "inherent messages" in what I read, perhaps particularly in modern literature, but even sometimes Jane Austen. [g] Too often I am dependent on critics and some sort of consensus building discussion.)
Lily wrote: "Shay, Linda, Sue -- is it possible to articulate the "inherent messages" in The Goldfinch? Or has this discussion already done so and I just need to read the book to understand?(I'm one of those..."
SPOILER ALERT
Ok, Lily, I will give you one. I think even this is a spoiler so just one as it relates to mortality. "Life is a temporary state."
Sue wrote: "SPOILER ALERTOk, Lily, I will give you one. I think even this is a spoiler so just one as it relates to mortality. "Life is a temporary state." ..."
Ah, how wonderfully tantalizing. I finally started this afternoon -- those first pages really have a hook -- I have to go keep reading to find out what happened to ....
Thx, Sue.
(With 800 pp, I hope not too temporary! [g])
oh god, this book was so amazing. I just finished it! I'm so glad this group gave me a chance to read something so awesome.I believe i was reading this part of the discussion a few days ago (when i was still not in section V), but now i can't find it exactly.. not sure if i should post in the general discussion, but there's more talk in this thread it seems, so maybe here then.. anyway, maybe it was somewhere else, but you guys were talking about the philosophy stuff at the end. and i think some people didn't like it? i'm not sure, i only peeked - was afraid of spoilers :) anyway, since it's about part V - i just wanted to say that i found the philosophy part at the end really really good (at least most of it), and some really good thoughts there, added some of the quotes to goodreads even.
it's quite brave to claim this in only January - knowing last year i read about a hundred books - but i can almost surely say, that no matter how many i will read this year, this will have probably been the best book i read in 2014.
Evelina wrote: "oh god, this book was so amazing. I just finished it! I'm so glad this group gave me a chance to read something so awesome.I believe i was reading this part of the discussion a few days ago (when..."
Evelina, I too am grateful for all the great insight this group shared, the moderator questions that provoked thought and additional discussion as well as the selection of a great piece of literature. In 2013, I declared The Orphan Master's Son as the best book I read (out of 42 books). I had the same thought about The Goldfinch. I wasn't quite ready to declare that already in January but it will likely be my best read in 2014. To add to that, I will need to see the painting myself in the museum in Le Havre myself. It's on my bucket list!
Glad you enjoyed the book! The ending was satisfactory for me. I thought it was a bit repetitive and drawn out but I felt good about the philosophizing of the author.
to tell you the truth - I wasn't expecting this ending! because throughout all of the book it seemed only bad things were looming, and all the apprehensions.. the tension was unbearable, I was pretty much just waiting for a tragedy or disaster of some sort :D
I noticed Shay here saying that the ending felt rushed.. for me it was quite the contrary! the book has ran me emotionally to the end, while still in the middle of the IV part I was already hoping they would just stop torturing me because my feels can't take it anymore xD so the ending was so very welcome - I couldn't take anymore of this emotional roller-coaster! hell, I don't even know why I got so emotionally dragged into the book, but I was suffering along with Theo, and it got unbearable by the middle.. maybe that's why the book was so awesome? it's like I lived it. not even like a movie - to me it was like an experience, and I don't even remember the last time this happened with a book.so long story short - I would have gone crazy if the ending had dragged on even a little bit more xD hahah
Mod
Evelina, I agree that emotionally it was time for the book to end, but I wished the characters in the end were more developed. That's the aspect that felt rushed to me. Perhaps the mystery of the men over in Europe is what makes the ending so good, but I wanted to know more. xandra played a relatively minor role in the story but her character was so real and lively. I wanted the same for the characters in the end.
Oh, you mean like those bad guys? for me they just felt like really episodic characters, so I didn't feel like they needed more. Xandra occupied quite a long period of time in the story, after all.the solution of it all was kind of quick though, I suppose.
Reading the string of comments and feelings by those of us that were thoroughly immersed in the story, I have to admit I was a bit afraid to get to the end. My worst fear was the ending would be so bad or so not believable that it would spoil the rest of the book for me. I was somewhat relieved and surprised. I couldn't imagine where the author was going to leave us and so if there was any anxiety for me with the book it was the approach to the last 100 pages. Think I created that anxiety in myself though!
Exactly, I was so sure it would end in disaster.. I can say the author really did surprise with the ending, cause she kept insisting that something bad eventually happens, so you just kept waiting for the thing.. turned out it didn't. in fact, while reading I often wondered how the book could end at all because at times there really seemed to be no way out whatsoever. even the suicide ending would have been pretty fitting I thought, and that was probably the top point of everything, cause same as the main character stopped being anxious after that, so did I. interesting way to weave a story, I still don't get it how she made me so involved in the story.
I like the 'lived it' comment. It's pretty spot on the nose for me. She brings us into very close sympathy with the character, and we are right there with him.So glad that so many enjoyed it and the discussions. Another example of what great members and commentators we have in this group.
Mod
I finished the book only a couple of days ago because of other concurrent reads that suddenly had their own deadlines. After a certain consideration, I am giving it five stars. And Boris saved the day for me and for the book in the final part. As many of you have already noticed, the ending is extremely satisfying.
I am absolutely mesmerized by the new interpretation of The Idiot when Boris makes a pronouncement that still lingers in my head and in my heart about good things that come out of bad things because bad things often happen out of good things like with Myshkin in the novel by Dostoevsky.
I also find Hobie's interpretation of art is the one what should be taught in schools. It is not the usual fluffy tail of "accomplishments of a painting" that matter, it is how it talks to you. His 'psst, hey, you' is simply brilliant.
Honestly, the ending is extremely satisfying because it appeals to my personal philosophy, a life philosophy that embraces existentialism that also means that suffering is a part of our life without any post-life justification. There is no inherent fairness in our universe; deal with it, embrace life, and live on.
And yet, there is secular redemption, the long, long journey that Theo undertakes at the end his novel to repay the damage, using the money obtained in a highly questionable way.
It is simply amazing how Tartt combines that deeply embedded Calvinistic, Protestant feeling of guilt (mostly like a cultural tradition, not a religious one) with modern secular philosophy of existentialism.
The book also opens a new perspective on a self-portrait, an avian self-portrait in our case :-) Life for Theo and for all of us is a semblance of freedom and free choice, but in fact there is this gold chain that links us to the inexplicable pattern some people call God and some people call Destiny/Fate.
actually, this is going to be out of place, but when i read that 'psst, hey you' part about the paintings, it just made me think of this a lot.. :Dhttp://9gag.com/gag/7078029/psst-hey-...
other than that, yeah, i also thought it's a good definition of what art is. or what it should be.
I really like your last paragraph (the gold chain part). i didn't think of that, that's a good point.
Spot on. Evelina! That's my motherland:-)
Zufilya, a great summary and coda to the discussions.'suffering is a part of our life without any post-life justification. There is no inherent fairness in our universe; deal with it, embrace life, and live on.'
-- this is great advice.
One of the things I loved most about the book was its sprawling, rambling bigness. It wasn't a concise, precise operation designed by the author to achieve a certain aim and mercilessly edited so that anything that didn't support it was lost. Like life, it was full of crossed paths and wires, looping roads and tangents, but in fact that very form meant that everything in it did support its main thrust, as summarised very well by you above.
Terry wrote: "One of the things I loved most about the book was its sprawling, rambling bigness. It wasn't a concise, precise operation designed by the author to achieve a certain aim and mercilessly edited so that anything that didn't support it was lost. Like life, it was full of crossed paths and wires..."that's what I liked about it too.. it's the way I want to look at life, at least. that generally, it's all winding and messy, but perhaps somewhere deep inside there is a plotline that we're following. maybe that's why the book felt like an experience rather than just a story?
21st Century Literature
Books mentioned in this topic
Americanah (other topics)The Flamethrowers (other topics)
Hardcover, pp 764
How did the painting define Theo?
The influence of many characters and elements that see very little 'page-time' are felt throughout the novel: the painting, Theo's mother, Pippa... how does Tartt show us how powerfully they affect Theo's life, without shining the light too directly upon them?