A Little Life - Part VI and Part VII (October 2015)

[Zulfiya]

The final two parts are the tragic, sad, and lyrical conclusion in this massive an heart-wrenching book.

1. Why did Jude agree to amputate his legs? Was his decision driven only by health concerns or were there other underlying reasons that readers are expected to speculate about?

2. Willem and Malcolm are tragically taken away from Jude's life. I am not asking whether it is logical lifewise (nothing is just and fair in this universe; life is what it is), but story-wise, do you think it was a wise decision? What did Yanagihara try to accomplish by this twist?

3. Harold is another storyteller in the novel. Why do we need him in the novel? Is his voice strong enough to tell the story to the very end?

4. Except Jude, were there any other characters with whom you could connect emotionally?

5. If the relationship between Jude and Willem can be called love, can true love be without sex? Is sex the affirmation of love or only a pleasant (in most cases) offshoot of the big feeling we call love?

Some very general questions.

1. Why do people read sad stories with sad endings?

2. Why do human sufferings play a very significant role in literature?

3. What is the relevance of the title to the novel?

4. Can an emotionally disturbing and torturous read be also a rewarding one?

[Lily]

Zulfiya wrote: "1. Why do people read sad stories with sad endings? .."

[Smile.] Sometimes, for me, I don't know what I am getting into when I start a story! But life has "sad endings" as well as "joyous or happy endings," so if one reads to understand or as some sort of catharsis, then of course some stories will have "sad endings." Then, there is a postmodern perspective that questions whether stories have "endings" per se. (Some wag has suggested that the traditional fairy tale that "ends" in love marks the true beginning of difficulties.)

[Zulfiya]

I am sorry if the question sounds simplistic, but what I mean is that most people do have some foreknowledge about the content of the book. I believe in the modern world this is unavoidable because no one lives in the world of total isolationism; hardly ever any book is a 'tabula rasa' type of experience. So knowing that the book will be about the unbearable existential pain, why do people still read? Is it the masochistic emotional purging? Is this masochistic purging necessary for those who read books/watch movies/ attend different artistic performances?

This book is definitely a story; it is not a post-modern exercise of epidemiological nature with several endings, and none of them is realistic/plausible/ believable or all of them are realistic/ plausible/believable, but I have to admit I do love post-modern fiction with its entropy of reality, but sometimes I just like a good story even if it will wrench my heart out of its place in the rib cage :-)

[Teanka]

When I started reading this novel I didn't know the extent of how heartbreaking it would be. For instance, I suspected that Jude wouldn't live till the very end and that he either would kill himself or die of his illness. What I didn't expect that Willem would die before him, especially after they've found one another. I remembered from the opening chapters that I thought the story about Jude was told by Harold to someone, and I presumed he was talking to Willem. That's why I always assumed that Jude would have been dead by the end of the book, but not Willem to. In some regards, I think Willem and Malcolm's deaths was just a little too much to bear but also it sort of completed the story. I wished for a more open ending, and would have been happier if the book ended somewhere in the 'Happy Years' chapters, but the actual ending provides the story with closure.

As for the decision to amputate his legs, I think Jude was extremely tired of the ordeal he was going through and Andy had told him already that anyone in his place would have given in a long time ago. Also, I was very surprised at how much better he walked after the amputation. This left me wondering why it took him so long to come to that decision.

Zulfiya wrote: "So knowing that the book will be about the unbearable existential pain, why do people still read? "

In order to learn something more about other people, to understand why they do what they do? I think this novel explained to me why an intelligent human being like Jude couldn't stop inflicting pain on himself and his beloved ones and never fully recovered. If I heard about such situation in real life, it would be very easy to judge the person's family or friends, saying they should have stopped him or her. But as I've learned from this book, some things may be incurable and it might be too complicated to comprehend or fully help the person.

[LindaJ^]

2. Willem and Malcolm are tragically taken away from Jude's life. I am not asking whether it is logical lifewise (nothing is just and fair in this universe; life is what it is), but story-wise, do you think it was a wise decision? What did Yanagihara try to accomplish by this twist

Wise? Not sure if the decisions and author makes in writing a novel are ones I can opine on for the perspective of whether they were wise. However, having Malcolm and Wilhem die together was shattering, even in a book that has already been gut wrenching. But it was consistent with what she was doing. Once again, just when Jude's life seemed to be going well, he is dealt a devastating blow. How he managed to go on shows amazing resilence. I am often astounded at how people continue on after horrible things occur in their lives.

[Lily]

Zulfiya wrote: "I am sorry if the question sounds simplistic, but what I mean is that most people do have some foreknowledge about the content of the book. I believe in the modern world this is unavoidable because..."

I'm sorry if I somehow came across as flippant. I really didn't know what I was getting into when I started this novel. In fact, I have fled from it for a few days ( The Time in Between ), to a story which, although set among nations in the throes of political turmoil, is much lighter and more optimistic (and less realistic?) about human dealings within the challenges of the world in which they function. I do find most long novels (worth reading?) carry surprises deep in their innards -- places where as a reader I am vulnerable to the insights of the writer. (One of the reasons I find interesting Whitney's comparisons of LL with what is happening in fan fiction today.)

Personally, I read largely to understand the world from perspectives other than my own -- to test my own perceptions and assumptions and to broaden what I can experience directly. Also, frankly, to gain empathy for and understanding of views different than my own -- whether I succeed or not.

But that doesn't mean but what I may shield myself from certain stories in some cases and open myself to others as deeply troubling. Do I know the parameters by which I make those choices? No, I don't think I do. I have never really considered an umbrella of "masochistic purging", even though I have wondered at the times of the attraction and popularity of certain horror or apocalyptic or dystopian movies.

[Lily]

Off point, but I just followed the link for the book by the author of today's (10/27/2015) quotation, and its description and reviews remind me of what we seem to be experiencing with LL:

Woman at Point Zero by Nawal El-Saadawi

[Maureen]

Linda wrote: "2. Willem and Malcolm are tragically taken away from Jude's life. I am not asking whether it is logical lifewise (nothing is just and fair in this universe; life is what it is), but story-wise, do ..."

While I finished reading this novel yesterday, I was exhausted by it, and took some time before commenting

I agree with Linda that the deaths of Wilhem, Malcolm, and Sophia were "shattering." I was shocked, much as we are in real life when someone we care about dies. And we now know that Jude never really recovered from losing Wilhem.

In a previous commentary thread, I believe it was Zulfiya who asked if this book could be a tragedy in the classic, Greek sense. This has been running in the back of my mind throughout the rest of my reading.

Jude seems to qualify as a tragic hero, as the reader feels he is better than the common person and in that sense noble as Aristotle discusses in his Poetics. He, at an early age, throughout all of his formative years has survived brutal neglect, abuse of all forms, cruelty. How he has risen above this degradation to get himself to Boston and to acquire prestigious education in both Boston and New Haven is a mystery. Since we know nothing of his parentage, one wonders from where he drew inner strength, persistence, and glimmers of hope to just survive through age 15. As an adult, he has become a highly competent and effective litigator, respected and loved by many.

As a tragic hero, his hamartia, tragic flaw, seems to be his stubbornness in and reluctance to revealing his past even to those whose love, care, concern for him is steadfast, so contrary to his earlier life. Clearly he needs psychological help, probably years of it, but he resists, and only in later years gave Dr. Loehmann some of the truth of his tortured past. His self-loathing is intrinsic.

Jude's downfall caused by his tragic flaw is a long, tortured adult life, subject to unimaginable physical pain and ailments and horrifying memories which keep reappearing, especially as nightmares. The only way he can relieve this pain is by exacerbating his physical pain by cutting himself despite the fine line between life and death caused by these actions. He actually flirts, not to minimize the seriousness of his situation, with suicide, and like many other suicide survivors is shocked that he hasn't succeeded. And, of course, all this concludes with his long, drawn out path to death.

All of his experience, despite the pure kindness of friends and even Harold and Julia's adoption of him, is almost inconceivable, especially to readers who have not experienced such immense abuse. However, he is not Oedipus; he has not been cursed by the gods. Fate does not bring his misery and eventual death. The raw, all too real dehumanizing abuse of his first fifteen years is the cause. We live in a society where many of the walking wounded are all around us, whether we realize it or not. Ultimately this is the lasting horror of this novel. As readers we cannot look away, we cannot plead ignorance. We know that many of society's problems are caused by the wounded who lash outward instead of inward as Jude does. We know adequate care for the psychologically tortured in our midst does not exist. And we know that there are many people around us who, if they allowed us to peak beneath their masks, their surfaces, would reveal similarly deplorable experiences such as Jude suffered.

To return to classic tragedy, Aristotle recommends a catharsis, a purging of suffering for the audience so they can endure the tragic hero's pain. While there does not seem to be evidence of catharsis in the novel, even though at times Jude seemed at the brink of a cathartic, healing experience, I do think there is a sense of catharsis in the many loving, loyal people in Jude's life. The pain those who loved him endured, the repeated, unconditional love they demonstrated provides us some sense of hope, that life can go on, that we can breathe, and perhaps that the walking wounded among us will receive the help they desperately need and deserve.

[LindaJ^]

Maureen wrote: "Linda wrote: "2. Willem and Malcolm are tragically taken away from Jude's life. I am not asking whether it is logical lifewise (nothing is just and fair in this universe; life is what it is), but s..."

Excellent analysis. I had not thought about the walking wounded.

[Maureen]

Linda wrote: "Maureen wrote: "Linda wrote: "2. Willem and Malcolm are tragically taken away from Jude's life. I am not asking whether it is logical lifewise (nothing is just and fair in this universe; life is wh..."

Thanks, Linda.