Brain Pain discussion
Under the Volcano - Spine 2014
>
Discussion - Week One - Under the Volcano - Chapter 1 - 3
date
newest »
newest »
Mod
What do you make of the British driver "rescuing" him from his face plant and subsequent reverie on the street? A connection ..."
There's a lot going on in that scene. That dry British humor and reserve, offering a man who just collapsed a drink of whiskey - Irish, not Scotch - at about 9:30 in the morning, plus an invitation for more drinks. And certainly, the contact with a fellow Brit brings back the accent.
The bad news: I'm going at approximately a one-page-per-three-minutes pace here. I can't tell what the hell is going on behind all these words. I don't do this very often, but: I QUIT! I have too many other things I want to read, and I can tell that if I stick with this book, it will torture me for at least a month.The good news: I forgot to add this book to my "currently reading" shelf, so now I don't have to delete it, either!
Mod
I had a similar 'oh fuck!' moment at the beginning of the book. Chapter Two picks up the pace and Chapter three was quite good.
Try again at some future date, if you can....
Jim wrote:Lowry begins his novel using a technique often found in film noir – the aftermath of some disaster involving a death, then a recounting of events leading up to the crisis.The choice of Laruelle as a narrator is very interesting. As a filmmaker,he brings cinematic techniques to his telling & it also indulges Lowry's own interest in the movies. A lot is conveyed by means of film posters- Peter Lorre's Hands of Orlac for instance. I'm still not through with this week's reading & that's cause I got caught up with the hypertext but I think I'll race through this book. It's amazing!
Jim wrote:An early occurrence of an emoticon: ‘-’ How have you been translating this symbol as you read through the dialogue?The ellipses! IJ got me used to that. How do you interpret silence? Sometimes silence speaks a thousand volumes!
How the reader interprets the non-response is something that tells more abt the reader than the character perhaps?
Down the sad,slippery,memory lane we go! "...the combination of the sunset,the Day of the Dead,and 1939 creates from the outset a world about to plunge into darkness." The Consul dominates the consciousness of Laruelle & through him,ours. It's only appropriate that the Day of the Dead would bring a sombre mood & remembrance of things past.I wish we had a Mexican guide along for this read to help pronounce the oh-so-difficult Mexican words & explain the places.
Stephen Spender's intro has kind of eased the entry into this book but now I wonder how to read and discuss "the most allusive text after Ulysses"!
I'll share two examples that show how in two very short passages,with effortless ease,Lowry brings a world of religious,mythological,and historical references:
The superimposition of the Consul & Yvonne's tragic tale over the tragedy of Maximilian and Carlota's Mexican adventure & the whole weight of history is borne down upon this story with this ruined palace,with its immense sense of loss and decay- foreshadowing in retrospect,the inevitable sad ending of the Consul's own tale.
And again on page 34 in my edition:"Here was finality indeed...between opposite sides of the Atlantic."
William Gass is on record that he was able to read this book only after several false starts & then he went on to rank UTV along side The Recognition as the two towering achievements of the 1950s– perhaps Gass was trying to parse each & every reference-laden line! That can be so frustrating.
So my question remains- how do we approach this book?
The link between Geoffrey Firmin's *discovery* in the Hell's Bunker with a girl by Laruelle & the thing that immediately follows:"They all went to a tavern with some queer name, as “The Case is Altered.” It was patently the first time the Consul had ever been into a bar on his own initiative; he ordered Johnny Walkers all round loudly,"–& this was a boy,who in a household full of heavy drinkers,never touched a drink!So are feelings of shame and/or guilt linked to his subsequent alcoholism?
Firmin's ( a play on infirm) orphaned childhood,his India connection makes me feel for him- he was used to loss from a tender age.
The letter 'discovered' by Laruelle in the Consul's book,is a vital clue to the Consul's damaged psyche- it's heartbreaking in its sadness:"For myself I like to take my sorrow into the shadow of old monasteries, my guilt into cloisters and under tapestries, and into the misericordes of unimaginable cantinas where sad-faced potters and legless beggars drink at dawn, whose cold jonquil beauty one rediscovers in death. So that when you left, Yvonne, I went to Oaxaca. There is no sadder word.(...)my secrets are of the grave and must be kept. And this is how I sometimes think of myself, as a great explorer who has discovered some extraordinary land from which he can never return to give his knowledge to the world: but the name of this land is hell.
It is not Mexico of course but in the heart. "
There's so much in this book that reminds me of Graham Greene's writing- the lethal combination of international politics and religious guilt not to mention the loser hero or rather the anti-hero and the sad endings,almost always the sad endings.
The Lord Jim connection is not just limited to the incident on S.S.Samaritan- just like Jim,the Consul is in a place where he is not wanted- England has broken off diplomatic relations with Mexico & all her diplomats are being recalled home,why then he lingers on?–this incapacity/unwillingness for timely action ( which will have fatal consequences) is his tragic flaw. His is the tragedy of an exile but it's a self-imposed one.
The Consul makes his entry after we have known his most anguished, inmost thoughts & then we see the contrast between his thoughts and his actions but the letter has already predisposed us to take a sympathetic view of him- is Lowry manipulating the reader here?
Mala wrote: "The letter 'discovered' by Laruelle in the Consul's book,is a vital clue to the Consul's damaged psyche- it's heartbreaking in its sadness:"For myself I like to take my sorrow into the shadow of o..."
@mala I love Graham Greene and also see the similarities, but I think the writing in Under the Volcano has more depth.
Mala, I enjoyed your observations. I, too, have started and stopped this novel on a couple of occasions, and after only a couple of pages. I think I've watched the movie twice, young and drunk, and only remember the mood. Now I can't imagine trying to translate this to film, but John Huston is pretty good with good source material, and I look forward to watching it a month or so after finishing the read.
Chapter 3 gave me the most pleasure I've had reading prose since I discovered Gaddis many years ago. I've spent some extended times down in a small village in Mexico (my aunt lives on the Yucatan) and I have a couple of familiars of my own in regards to hooch, and those facets definitely fed my appreciation of Geoffrey's first chapter in the spotlight. The prose, from the very start really knocks me out. I pine for the days when a (was he 'mainstream at the time?') novelist pulled no punches and assumed his audience could keep up with anything he threw at them. Pretty much blown away.
and yeah, I was so used to the "..." in DFW's books, I took the "-" as simply, a pause, a beat, so you knew there was no response to one side of the dialogue and you could follow who was speaking.
Juan wrote:I'm Colombian and bilingual so if you have any questions regarding the Spanish text, I'll translate (unless we stumble across some obscure colloquialisms, in which case I'll ring up one of my Mexican friends).Thanks,Juan. The Hypertextual Companion in the resource section pretty much covers everything but then one has to go & click on the link again & again!
I think if you come across anything ( esp.those posters in a foreign language), just share the translation in your posts along with other observations,of course.
James wrote:@mala I love Graham Greene and also see the similarities, but I think the writing in Under the Volcano has more depth.I agree. I brought up the similarities cause thematically,I felt, I'm on familiar grounds here though the stylistic treatment is of course far more complex and layered here. Your five stars rating made me very happy!
Btw,I dig your new profile pic- do repost it so it shows the 'like' option.
Larry wrote: "Mala, I enjoyed your observations. I, too, have started and stopped this novel on a couple of occasions, and after only a couple of pages. I think I've watched the movie twice, young and drunk, a..."
Why,thank you Larry!
I've loved the film version & the casting of Albert Finney was a touch of genius. After finishing the book,I'll watch it again.
In a way,with the plot suspense out of the way,I'm able to focus better on Lowry's craftmanship here.
Both you & Jim have singled out the third chapter for appreciation but I've loved this book from the get go!
No,I don't think Lowry was ever mainstream & yes it really takes guts basing a book on an alcoholic but then he wasn't writing so much here as he was "being written" if you get my drift.
Mala wrote:"England has broken off diplomatic relations with Mexico & all her diplomats are being recalled home,why then he lingers on?"Alright,I got the answer in Chapter 3 when the Consul tells Yvonne:"What’s the use of escaping,” he drew the moral with complete seriousness, “from ourselves?”
The dude is having existential dilemma whereby one may escape geography but how does one escape the philosophical implications of being?
In real life,Lowry did get to live with his wife in his paradisiacal retreat in Canada but the Consul here is fixated on the William Blackstone ideal–to assimilate his otherness in the otherness of a place- a lot is happening here: over the explorer idea is superimposed his own father's wanderings in India & over the idea of Mexico is superimposed the idea of India. As an Indian,I find his association of the Himalayan region of Kashmir ( which is called the Switzerland of India) with the dry topography of Mexico rather amusing,maybe it's India as a metaphor of a place where he has his original roots & he is trying to replicate that here in another exotic place cause we must remember that despite his faith in the idea of the Empire,as a bi-racial, Anglo-Indian;(Geoffrey Firmin is after all a product of this very colonialism),his very biology rules him out as a pucca sahib: he remains an outsider everywhere–
"...the poor Consul’s job was merely a retreat, that while he had intended originally to enter the Indian Civil Service, he had in fact entered the Diplomatic Service only for one reason and another to be kicked downstairs into ever remoter consulships, and finally into the sinecure in Quauhnahuac as a position where he was least likely to prove a nuisance to the Empire, in which with one part of his mind at least, M. Laruelle suspected, he so passionately believed."
And to answer Jim's query on the subtext of the shrinking British Empire: Lowry has very subtly given hints about the nature of Britain's diplomatic row with Mexico when the Englishman who encounters the consul sprawled face down on a street,casually mentions:"Pity about all this oil business, isn’t it? Bad show.—"
From the hypertextual companion:"There was in 1938-39 no British consulate in Cuernavaca, but the British diplomatic service in Mexico City maintained a property on the Calle Humboldt (Lowry's Calle Nicaragua) as a weekend residence, and this acted as a point of contact for the not inconsiderable British community then living in Cuernavaca."
Till now almost all the political situations- the Spanish Civil War, Mexico's internal political changes have been mentioned in passing remarks,via foreign-language posters that readers,not in on those events and language,are likely to miss them. Pay attention to everything in the text.
Chapter three begins:"The tragedy, proclaimed, as they made their way up the crescent of the drive, no less by the gaping potholes in it than by the tall exotic plants, livid and crepuscular through his dark glasses, perishing on every hand of unnecessary thirst staggering, it almost appeared, against one another, yet struggling like dying voluptuaries in a vision to maintain some final attitude of potency, or of a collective desolate fecundity,(...) the plantains with their queer familiar blooms, once emblematic of life, now of an evil phallic death. You do not know how to love these things any longer."Pay attention to the sexual imagery as if the underlying tension of Consul and Yvonne's estranged relationship has been extended to the plant life in a long transferred epithet. And then what follows? Nothing:
"Strychnine is an aphrodisiac.
Perhaps it will take immediate effect. It still may not be too late.”
In the Afterword,Vollmann has called this scene one of the saddest moments in the book but is the Consul's impotence derived solely from his alcoholism or is it also cause of his subconscious resentment of Yvonne's infidelities? ( In the bar scene earlier,he had identified her with the scarlet woman,the whore of Babylon).
Could a great tumble in the bed fix everything that has gone wrong with a marriage?(view spoiler)
"In a sense what happened was a sign of my fidelity, my loyalty; any other man would have spent this last year in a very different manner. At least I have no disease,” he cried in his heart, the cry seeming to end on a somewhat doubtful note, however."
Mala wrote: "Both you & Jim have singled out the third chapter for appreciation but I've loved this book from the get go!"As have I!
Mod
Let's have a bit less Vollmann and a bit more Debnath please!
Mod
Let's have a bit less Vollmann and a bit more Mala please!
Jim wrote:Let's have a bit less Vollmann and a bit more Mala please!What is Mala to do if her views resemble that of a certain writer?!
I think Yvonne was trying to help her ex-husband– If she hadn't really been concerned,why else would she be here? But even if she chose to settle for an asexual relationship;her past transgressions would make it impossible for Geoffrey to see that as nothing but patronising & he would reject her.
So the question is,is a marriage over if sex is no longer a part of it? Aren't spouses supposed to help each-other through difficult times?
There comes a time in every marriage when due to various reasons,sex is no longer possible or even desirable. Recently I came across this quote that goes something like : Sex is the consolation for those who have never had love.
There is still love in the Consul-Yvonne relationship as his unsent letter has proved and in any case passion has a short shelf life- sometimes compassion is a better substitute.
And while we are on it– more of Jim too,pls. Looks like the Volcanoes lost him to the Arcades!
Boy does Geoff love Yvonne but that bottle of tequila keeps calling him from the shrubs. As far as he's concerned it has nothing to do with Yvonne and she's doing her best to agree...
Mod
So the question is,is a marriage over if sex is no longer a part of it? Aren't spouses supposed to help each-other through difficult times?
There comes a time in every marriage when due to various reasons,sex is no longer possible or even desirable. Recently I came across this quote that goes something like : Sex is the consolation for those who have never had love..."
Just to clarify, are you basing this on the whole book? Or what we've read so far? As of Chapter 3 we don't have much detail about why she left, why she divorced him, and exactly what she did with Hugh. They are, at this point in the book, divorced, and her exact reasons for being back in Mexico don't seem to be because she wants to fuck her ex, but more like she's returned to the scene of the crime to view the aftermath.
I found Geoffrey's self-chat about the supposed aphrodisiac effects of strychnine to be amusing, and the idea that Yvonne actually wanted sex at that moment as completely delusional on the part of a man suffering from some kind of alcoholic dementia.
At first I was worried I would do as Sosen did...I had a hard time with the first chapter, which I tried to read already tired just before going to sleep. Mistake. But, things have picked up in chapters 2 and 3, though I am by no means proceeding at a blistering pace.
You all have a lot of love for chapter 3, but I have actually been thinking quite a bit about chapter two: the long walk to their old house, with its constant interruptions. We see the surroundings, and especially, we keep seeing the text of the signs that they pass by, and of these, mostly we see posters for some kind of fight or boxing match that is upcoming. And I asked myself why the text was structured like this, constant interruptions, the surroundings and the exchanges between the two of them all muddled together (especially as it makes for difficult reading).
My first thought was that the constant repetition of the boxing match was meant to evoke the competition between Jacques and Geoff for Yvonne (did Jacques have an affair with her? Did Hugh? It seems like yes, but I went back searching for textual evidence and there is precious little; there is in chapter one a mention of Jacque's passion for Yvonne, which even that may be in the context of film somehow).
Then my second thought was that this constant distraction also reproduces a sort of self-protecting blanking out on Yvonne's part; she does not seem to want to have whatever conversation they are having, which seems to be about Geoff's drinking and about her affair(s)(?) and about their divorce and their marriage all at once, and yet is also not terribly explicit. But all this seems to be something she does not want to think about or listen to, and so we get the scenery as she looks at it, stopping us (and her) from entering into the thread of things, and of having any explicit account of events.
And then I ended up here near the end of chapter two, which seemed to confirm this was maybe the desired effect:
"Yvonne smiled, full of thoughts that had already swept her a thousand miles in frantic retreat from all this. Yet she was walking on slowly beside him. And deliberately as a climber on a high unguarded place looks up at the pine trees above on the precipice and comforts himself by saying : 'Never mind about the drop below me, how very much worse if I were on top of one of those pine up there!' she foced herself out of the moment : she stopped thinking : or she thought about the street again, remembering her last poignant glimpse of it -- and how even more desperate things had seemed then! -- at the beginning of that fateful journey to Mexico City, glancing back from the now lost Plymouth as they turned the corner..."
And I see now also that this whole post is practically one long run-on sentence, which may mean that Lowry's prose is contagious. Anyway.
Finally, a stupid question. Why is he drinking strychnine? Is it like some kind of narcan for alcoholics?
Mod
One thing to keep in mind is that this is Geoffrey's last day alive, and so there is lot of his "life flashing before his eyes" kind of stuff - regrets, triumphs, failures and ecstasies all rolled together into the compressed time frame of this final day. I don't know where Lowry is taking this story, but I imagine we can expect this kind of jumping around to continue.
Mod
I read this as sparring between spouses, especially since they are now officially divorced after she left him, unannounced, several months earlier. There's likely to be a fair amount of these jabs and thrusts and parries as the book continues, especially once Hugh shows up.
Jim wrote: "I read this as sparring between spouses,"Ah, you're probably right. It never occurred to me that Yvonne might be the second boxer. So much for my feminist street cred.
Mod
Well, Lady* boxers were probably rare in 1938...
There are other conflicts/boxing matches going on too: Mexico vs. England, brother vs. brother, alcohol vs. sobriety, one volcano vs. the other, and so on. I could be projecting a lot of this, but Lowry telegraphs a lot and he's pretty heavy-handed in his symbols, so we'll have to see what happens as the bout(s) progresses.
(*is "lady" still allowable in a feminist era?)
Nicole wrote: "Finally, a stupid question. Why is he drinking strychnine? Is it like some kind of narcan for alcoholics?"I was confused as hell about the "strychnine" too. Never heard of the poison as a medicinal. But then Hugh tells Yvonne, "Geoffrey calls it strychnine." He also refers to it as belladonna and nux vomica. And herb and a homeopathic medicine. I'm still not quite sure what's in that bottle.
Mod
FWIW, I take homeopathic nux vomica three times per week. If you search on 'nux vomica homeopathy' you'll find some info. One of the indications is for treating hangovers, which we should assume is why Geoffrey is using it.
Jim wrote:Just to clarify, are you basing this on the whole book? Or what we've read so far? As of Chapter 3 we don't have much detail about why she left, why she divorced him, and exactly what she did with Hugh. They are, at this point in the book, divorced, and her exact reasons for being back in Mexico don't seem to be because she wants to fuck her ex, but more like she's returned to the scene of the crime to view the aftermath.I've conscientiously tried to keep the discussion within the week's apportioned reading. There are enough hints about Yvonne's supposed affairs with Laruelle and Hugh- Geoffrey taunts her with references to Laruelle on their walk back home after he catches her looking at his "bizarre house", her responses to that are mostly "-".
In his passed out state on the street,he communicates with Hugh in an interior monologue- the curious thing throughout the three chapters is that the Consul acknowledges himself to be the driving factor behind their split- thus despite her lapse,Yvonne cannot be painted as a heartless woman who has "returned to the scene of the crime to view the aftermath." I've based my thoughts on the following quotes which I'm putting within spoilers cause they are one too many.
(view spoiler)
I found Geoffrey's self-chat about the supposed aphrodisiac effects of strychnine to be amusing, and the idea that Yvonne actually wanted sex at that moment as completely delusional on the part of a man suffering from some kind of alcoholic dementia.
I found that painful & I don't think that he was completely delusional in thinking about physical intimacy- All the Yvonne-related quotes I've shared would show that she had returned in a spirit of reconciliation- the woman is still wearing her wedding ring! The fact that he had physically *failed* with her before would've given him the idea to try & make things right- she had said "Well, we may have a little time together, mayn’t we?” The sexually suggestive beginning of the third chapter was conveyed through the consciousness of both these characters- the focus on the ruined garden- a lost paradise-her worries abt it- all these had raised the expectations of consummating the moment,only to have later deflated it.
That was the tragic irony of the scene- why would Yvonne cry otherwise?
As for the "alcoholic dementia"- uptil now,I find him quite lucid for a dipsomaniac.
Take a look at these quotes:
(view spoiler)
Mod
Nope. Still don't see this as a sexually specific moment. Love lost, yes. Broken hearts wishing to be mended, yes. Sex needed at that moment, no, hence the dark humor of him not being able to get it up.
Jim wrote:Nope. Still don't see this as a sexually specific moment. Love lost, yes. Broken hearts wishing to be mended, yes. Sex needed at that moment, no, hence the dark humor of him not being able to get it up.Well,my fav writer ( He who shall not be named here) agrees with my interpretation so...I would've been happy if Jim agreed with me too but there are as many interpretations as there are readers.
Let's agree to disagree.
Mod
Let's agree to disagree..."
One of the perils of reading afterwords and reviews and so on is that you reach conclusions outside the immediate text. Your conclusions here are going to continue to be biased to those conclusions based on the text as a whole. This year, we changed the format so that the whole book is available to comment on from the beginning. It might be best if you head on over to the fourth week discussion where conclusions about the book as a whole are to be discussed. Then you can share your interpretation based on the knowledge of the whole text.
"...he had not meant to elicit this, to thrust her back against the pillows ; he felt her body stiffen, becoming hard and cold. Yet her consent did not seem from weariness only, but to a solution for one shared instant beautiful as trumpets out of a clear sky..."If this is the moment at the end of chapter three that you are talking about, I'm going to have to go with Jim, based on the text. There are all kinds of reasons for Yvonne to be crying in the moments after this.
Mod
BTW, despite appearances, I'm not really insisting that my current conclusion is the 'truth' or even 'correct', but that based on the contents of the first three chapters, this is a reasonable conclusion. Like most noir-type stories, there is lots more information that will be revealed in the next nine chapters, and it is likely that I will change my ideas as the information unfolds. Chapter 4, for example, is already changing my perceptions...
Mala wrote: "There's so much in this book that reminds me of Graham Greene's writing-"I got that too, right from the beginning, but my observation was far more shallow: couple of dudes drinking, polite chat, both seemingly well-off but with plenty of leisure time, tip-toeing around a subject. Reminded me of scenes from Our Man in Havana.
I'm nearly done with ch 3 (gimme a break, I only started last night--joining in late at Mala's invite since you've had some quitters) and my reading experience so far was wildly uneven. Not a huge fan of the displaced-Anglocentric-social-circle-among-mysterious-locals kind of book, but found the way distant political shifts registered faint reverberations upon them quite intriguing. Would have liked a touch more. Some sentences are absolutely exquisite, while some have a Philip Roth-style clunkiness, where you have to read it twice to work out the pronoun-antecedent relationships:
"He had not liked the Consul's half-brother at their first encounter when he'd come with Yvonne and the Consul himself to M. laruelle's house in the Calle Nicaragua, any more, he felt now, than Hugh had liked him."
Later you can make sense of it but at first I was all whuuh? There are others.
His descriptions of the changes in quality of light as the day passes are fantastic, so that earns points with me, but I give demerits for every time I feel a harsh bonk on the head from symbolism, such as when Yvonne sees the picture of the glacier splitting in half when she looks through their reflection on the front glass of the print shop where they got their wedding invitations done. As if that weren't enough, the symbolism is explained to us. Then there is the swan that "plummeted to Earth" at the couple's first embrace after Yvonne's return. The ruined garden. The posters advertising the boxing match. The boxing match posters. The ads for a boxing event. OKAY!
But the descriptions of the town and surrounding environs are such a seductive pleasure to read. I so want to go back to Mexico and get drunk in a dive bar (no Mescal, please; that makes me crazy. I'll take a rum and Inca cola. Bubble-gum booze!)
And both the letter (which our narrator seemingly had zero qualms about reading, before or after) and Geoffrey's delusional rescue by Hugh were extraordinary writing, so that it didn't matter that the thoughts were so precise and lucid instead of being an expression of his state--quite distant from that.
The "--" to indicate a silent response was ordinary to me since video-game on-screen dialog has been doing that since early Nintendo, hee.
I'm torn on the sexual-tension question regarding Geoff and Yvonne's reunion. It did seem that there were hints, but that the hints were also snuffed. They both talked about how great the other looked and this was the first time human physicality got real emphasis in the description which up until then had been mostly spent on setting.
My reading was hurried, so I'm a little confused as to the relations. Was Hugh one of the hard drinking boys that Geoff grew up with? I got the impression the other boys were older in the flashback we get from the narrator when he spent a summer with them, but later Geoff sees Hugh as being more like a son. Also during that flashback I thought Geoff was adopted, but later they're described as half-brothers, so the poet father....?
I don't know if I'll have time to both go back and clear this up and catch up with you guys, but I'm going to prioritize the latter.
Mod
Hugh is the consul's younger half-brother. The one who was a baby when Geoffrey's step-mother died and Geoffrey was whisked back to England to live with the Taskerson's.
Ah! Ok, thanks for saving me the work! Ordinarily I don't ask for such remedial help but I read it at a pace this book discourages.
Mod
Just take a sip of the mescal and your pace will be perfect! (view spoiler)
BTW, We're only one week into the discussion so no need to go too fast.
Gregsamsa wrote: "Mala wrote: "There's so much in this book that reminds me of Graham Greene's writing-"I got that too, right from the beginning, but my observation was far more shallow: couple of dudes drinking,..."
Yeah Graham Greene via Joyce with a soupçon of Wm Burroughs - well that's the vibe I'm getting anyway. I'm reading it quite quickly as well and probably should go over parts that I've already read, but I just feel like forging on.
The narrative tends to go a bit bonkers during Geoffrey's parts which suggests his chaotic state of mind, which seems fair enough.
As far as any symbolism is concerned, I only get it if I'm smacked over the head with it.
Mod
I'll reply over on the Questions and resources thread...
I had many of the same reactions as Gregsamsa. I can see the resemblance to Graham Greene's writing. Parts of Geoffrey's drunken interior monologue also reminded me a bit of F. Scott Fitzgerald's The Beautiful and Damned. I particularly liked the line (from p. 88 of my copy-Perennial Classics) "who could agree with someone who was so certain you were going to be sober the day after to-morrow?"
Mod
I find myself torn between pity and anger at Geoffrey and I suspect this will carry on through the novel.
..."
It's a challenging book cover-to-cover. I kind of hated/loved it and loved/hated it. The chapters and scenes are quite variable in style, content, and feeling. Quite a day in life of a tortured soul...
Stick with it, Cphe, you'll find that few of the group's gripes are about the hazy style; they are pointed more toward kinda rigged twists and heavy symbolism.
Brain Pain
Books mentioned in this topic
The Beautiful and Damned (other topics)Our Man in Havana (other topics)
Lowry begins his novel using a technique often found in film noir – the aftermath of some disaster involving a death, then a recounting of events leading up to the crisis.
The story opens one year after the main drama has occurred. M. Laruelle wanders the darkening streets of Quauhnahuac recalling past memories of ‘The Consul’, aka Geoffrey Firmin, a lifelong friend since adolescence. Laruelle’s ‘chance’ discovery of a letter written to the Consul’s estranged wife, but never sent, gives us a window into Firmin’s pain and despair.
Flashback one year to the day as Yvonne returns to her husband and they walk amongst the shadows and ghosts of their former life together in Quauhnahuac. Mention of half-brother Hugh sends Yvonne into a bit of a reverie, but the details remain in soft focus for now.
Back at Casa Firmin, Yvonne and Geoffrey fumble their way through an awkward reunion. Meanwhile, Geoffrey and his two familiars hold a heated tête à tête à tête re: strychnine, whiskey, and various pro and con arguments for consumption versus abstention – and a bit about Yvonne and Hugh…
An early occurrence of an emoticon: ‘-’ How have you been translating this symbol as you read through the dialogue?
Geoffrey Firmin is attached to the British Consulate in Mexico. A subtext to this novel seems to relate to the shrinkage and near elimination of the British Empire in the 20th century. I haven’t read any extra-textual resources for this novel, but I can feel an undercurrent about that imperial decay. Any thoughts on this?
To avoid spoilers, please restrict your comments to p. 7 - 97