Brain Pain discussion
This topic is about
The Benefactor
The Benefactor - Spine 2014
>
Discussion - Week One - The Benefactor - Chap. One - Seven
date
newest »
newest »
I'm still reading the first section, and also still thinking about it, but already I've dug up the essay "against interpretation" to get a prelimary hold on the dreams.Whatever it may have been in the past, the idea of content is today mainly a hindrance, a nuisance, a subtle or not so subtle philistinism. Though the actual developments in many arts may seem to be leading us away from the idea that a work of art is primarily its content, the idea still exerts an extraordinary hegemony. I want to suggest that this is because the idea is now perpetuated in the guise of a certain way of encountering works of art thoroughly ingrained among most people who take any of the arts seriously. What the overemphasis on the idea of content entails is the perennial, never consummated project of interpretation. And, conversely, it is the habit of approaching works of art in order to interpret them that sustains the fancy that there really is such a thing as the content of a work of art.
She also describes interpretation variously as a kind of translation and an act of aggression. She is particularly hostile to Marxist and Freudian interpretations, the kinds of interpretation which "dig behind" the text to see what it "really" means. Which makes me wonder what she is about writing dreams about scantily clad men branishing their flutes and women demanding that he dance for them. Or "I am having a religious dream".
Also, to continue raising questions I cannot answer, why is our hero named Hippolyte (he who swore devotion to Artemis and thereby pissed off Aphrodite, he who rejected his step-mother's advances and suffered the inevitable consequences: dragged to his death, guilt, suicide, and other dysfunctional family dynamics)?
Further bulletins as events warrant.
Mod
To ensure we know she is well read....
This is her debut novel, and so it feels somewhat less than subtle in things like choosing the character name "Hippolyte".
I couldn't help but compare these opening chapters to the discussion over in the Kafka threads about the dream-esque-ness (new word) of his A Country Doctor. Hippolyte could be a character from Kafka, but there is a lack of Kafka's weirdness, uneasiness, and such. Instead, Hippolyte seems to be fairly seriously pursuing his dream world in an organized, scientific research kind of way. He comes up with a Hippothesis*, then tests his theory in the real world.
(*Sorry, had to...)
He is also involved with an older woman, though strictly speaking he should refuse to be involved with an older woman if he's Hippolytus....This quote struck me as resonating very much with the interpretation essay:
"Are your dreams merely allegories?" returned Professor Bulgaraux. "Do you believe that they present themselves to you as stories because you can't bear the shock of a naked idea?"
"Certainly not! My dreams are no more or less than the story they tell."
On the other hand, I suspect him of being not entirely reliable in this as well as in other respects.
Jim wrote: "Hippothesis"
:p
Mod
True - I can smell Unreliable Narrator a mile away in this book.
BTW, are you perceiving Hippolyte as a believable male character? So far, I am. This question comes up a lot when a male author writes a female character.
I guess yes, though the whole selling his girlfriend into slavery for her own good thing was maybe a little over the top. I like to think your typical man wouldn't do that.
Jim wrote: "Nicole wrote: "why is our hero named Hippolyte.."To ensure we know she is well read...."
Sontag failed in that when she made it clear that she had never heard of the word "supine" ;)
Jim wrote: "BTW, are you perceiving Hippolyte as a believable male character? So far, I am. This question comes up a lot when a male author writes a female character."Do you think this still applies to the story? I think of Hippolyte almost a neutrum character. For example, I think since there was not much like complex-psychological-love-drama-etc going on or something like that, it was all mostly in the superficial side (view spoiler). I think it's hard to explain, but seems to me that the gender game was not "exercised" or on the safe side. Would you agree? Or do you think there could have been bigger reasons why Sontag decided to have Hippolyte specifically as a male character?
I just couldn't get this image of Hippolyte out of my head. I don't think it helped my appreciation of the book.
Mod
The question I was wondering about was Sontag's choice of a male protagonist, and if, having made that choice, she did a convincing job of writing a male character. A criticism I hear occasionally is that some male authors don't write believable female characters, and so how did Sontag do with Hippolyte?
Short answer: yes. I don't think Hippolyte lacked any male characteristics. That said, maybe because everything is more on the surreal side, probably is why I have this feeling that Hipplyte didn't end up being a very complex male character, lets say compared to Humbert Humbert from Lolita. But yes, I'm also very intrigued as to why Sontag might have decided to specifically go with a male character.
I found the character so stilted and ridiculous, it's impossible for me to say if it was a believable stilted and ridiculous male or not, since I have trouble with 'believable' at all.
Hippolyte is a generalized younger son from a generalized wealthy European family. He gained some small fame for a published philosophical work, but did not capitalize on this success, nor did he finish his studies. He lives in a generalized European city and attends a salon hosted by a generalized American hausfrau. The generalized salon guests have generalized CV’s and hold generalized soirées, in general…
Hippolyte has been dreaming some very specific dreams with very specific characters engaging in specific actions, night after night. In these opening chapters, Hippolyte attempts to bring the specifics of this dream world into his generalized life in hopes of…. of….. well, it isn’t completely clear what he hopes for, at least not yet.
Sontag has borrowed heavily from European literature using a narrative voice that at times might be coming from Camus, Kafka, Mann, and others. What do you think about this borrowing? Is it simple mimicry? Or is she trying to say something about male European writers?
To avoid spoilers, please limit your comments to p. 1 – 97.