Sophie & the Sibyl - Part Two and Whole Book (spoilers allowed) (Sep 2017)

[Hugh]

This topic is for discussion of Part Two and thoughts on the whole book. Spoilers are allowed.

[SueLucie]

Re Peter's and Casceil's comments in other sections:

I had exactly your problem. I've read to the end and it took me a very long time. I've learned some interesting things (and as others have said, as much through googling the references then carrying on researching around the subject than from the novel itself) but found myself distracted more and more. Perhaps it's because I knew already how it goes for the Sybil and George (and John), and rather lost interest in the Sophie/Max story. Whatever the reason, I found myself trudging on towards the end and that's never a good feeling. I liked her writing style, though, and thought she brought it off well - while I was engaged with the story I enjoyed it very much.

[Lily]

Finished today. A good "vacation" book. Am wondering how much is fiction, how much is not. Am not like Sue, interested enough to go searching. But I will stay aware as tidbits about Eliot come my way.

While I enjoyed the writing, I often felt the author was writing as much for herself, exploring ideas in which she was interested and concocting a fun tale, but without sustained "purpose" insofar as her reader was concerned.

[Hugh]

Thanks Lily.

I am sure that I have a weakness for writers who are more interested in exploring ideas than plotting, hence A.S. Byatt being one of my favourites.

I have not yet found time to re-read this - one of the things that remains strongest in my memory is Sophie's performance of Tam Lin (and the parts of that which were excised from the better known but slightly bowdlerised version by Fairport Convention).

I would also be interested if anyone can relate to what she did with Daniel Deronda - I have not read that so I don't really know how many games she played...

[SueLucie]

That aspect I did like a lot. The Gwendolyn Harleth character (Sophie) gets to win, not only at cards but in her personal life. There is much made of how George Eliot, an independent woman who wants to have it all, and does, including another woman's man and her children's father, doesn't allow her free-spirited character the same outcome, instead she is squashed by convention and left to do good works in the hope of redemption.
I'm not sure what other parallels there are to Daniel Deronda and look forward to others' comments.

[Lily]

Sue wrote: " ...doesn't allow her free-spirited character the same outcome, ..."

It struck me that Professor Dunkler seemed to "put down" her protagonist (Sybil) in ways not dissimilar to the ones she accuses (teaches?) G.E. of doing. Or am I being simply too flippant, too cynical? ( I am not someone to ardently defend G.E., so no "traditionalism" in my reaction. But I do find myself now asking if Dunkler's view is valid or just another case professional challenge.)

[Kathleen]

Lily wrote: "Sue wrote: " ...doesn't allow her free-spirited character the same outcome, ..."

It struck me that Professor Dunkler seemed to "put down" her protagonist (Sybil) in ways not dissimilar to the ones..."

I too wondered about this, and agree that I wouldn't mind a challenge to GE, but couldn't really figure out where Duncker was coming from. Then in the afterword she says as much as she loved the author, she wouldn't have liked the person, and also mentions "...the grain of resentment one writer always feels for another whom she hails as 'Master' ..."

Not sure if that had and impact, and also not sure writers always feel that kind of resentment?

[Nastasya]

I read this quite quickly and found it interesting, at least on an intellectual level if not an emotional one, as pointed out elsewhere. The distance between us and the characters was somewhat like what I felt reading The Essex Serpent, which seemed to provoke a similar reaction in its discussions, too.

I sympathised and wanted the best for all the characters. Unlike everyone else, I actually liked the Sybil the best, for her kind wisdom. I'm not about to begrudge a character's insatiable appetite for adoration. I rather hoped Sophie would back down and there would be some closing reconciliation. Oh well.

I read Nuala O'Connor's Miss Emily recently, a fictional story about Emily Dickinson and her maid. I'm intrigued by the growing trend of writing real authors into fiction. Has anyone read other examples of this?

On a small side note, I've already started The Glass Room for next month (it's great) and the characters in that book stay in the exact same Venice hotel mentioned in this one, but fifty years later. Funny, I thought.

[SueLucie]

I've just finished a preview copy of Mrs Osmond by John Banville, a sequel to A Portrait of a Lady, well done I thought. And there was Longbourn by Jo Baker, a behind-the-scenes view of Pride & Prejudice from the perspective of the servants - loved that one. These don't feature real authors, though.

One that does - Larchfield by Polly Clark, featuring a time-shift encounter with W H Auden, is worth a look. You're right, Nastasya, it seems to be a trend these days, but in the right hands I enjoy them. I must look out for Miss Emily.

I read and really enjoyed The Glass Room a few years ago and am not going to revisit it this month, but will be starting on Visitation soon.

[Lily]

Nastasya wrote: "....Unlike everyone else, I actually liked the Sybil the best, for her kind wisdom. I'm not about to begrudge a character's insatiable appetite for adoration. ..."

I didn't "dislike" Sybil, I just didn't find that Dunkler developed her into the fully believable, somewhat bigger than life, yet very vulnerable woman that I suspect George Eliot must have been. I read too many times how unattractive Sybil was -- well, I knew that about G.E. going into the story, and I suspect most readers do. We don't need to have it banged over our heads. Dunkler does give some sense of her kindnesses, of the ennui of having to roam the Continent, of a quiet reliance on Lewis, of the pressures of fame, of sensitivity to "Jewish issues," of the succor of giving and receiving quiet attention. But I didn't have a sense of really getting to know Sybil emotionally -- how hurtful was hurt, how steel was steel, how needy was .... What about her impacted what happened in Venice....

I felt I understood Sophie and Max, even Wolfgang, much better in terms of their emotional reactions to what was happening to and around them.

[Lily]

Sue wrote: "You're right, Nastasya, it seems to be a trend these days, but in the right hands I enjoy them. ..."

My f2f book group read Vanessa and Her Sister by Priya Parmar. It is such a contrast to A Very Close Conspiracy: Vanessa Bell and Virginia Woolf by Jane Dunn. Parmar has said in interview that she used many of the same sources. But the sister who "won" the sibling rivalry felt quite different in each.

Some of you may remember the concerns I expressed here a few years ago about Euphoria by Lily King. Ms. King stated clearly that her story was "inspired" by Margaret Mead, rather than fictionalized biography per se. Her publishers/publicists always seemed less careful to make the distinction.

These two experiences have taken me to a rather cynical view towards these works. I find myself asking what were the motivations -- of writer, of publisher, of others. What axes were there to grind? What financial opportunities? (Appreciation of the value of Vanessa's paintings? -- that one is pure speculation on my part. I find it fascinating that a movie based on Euphoria has not appeared to date. Current interest in a topic, real or stimulated, can drive sales.)

[Robert]

I read the first three chapters and I just could get into the book. I will reread it but at the right time. A pity because I like Hugh's suggestions.

[Casceil]

I finally finished the book tonight. At least it is still September. I feel like this book somehow just did not come together into anything complete. There were many interesting and/or amusing anecdotes, but somehow they did not seem to add up to a novel for me.

[Peter]

Lilly, while some writers may do it for sales, but really, I think the appeal from the writers' point of view with novels with historical characters is a chance to play with history and the people in it. Historical fiction has always been like that -- writers won't be restricted to only playing with the minor characters!

[Nastasya]

Peter wrote: "Lilly, while some writers may do it for sales, but really, I think the appeal from the writers' point of view with novels with historical characters is a chance to play with history and the people ..."

I agree, the idea of unleashing a well-known figure on a story is tantalising.

I'm intrigued by the books Lily mentions. Of course, Virginia Woolf and her sister Vanessa also featured in The Hours, which I liked. It's probably true about publishers wanting to cash in, though.

[Casceil]

Nastasya, I loved Euphoria, and highly recommend it. Here is a link to my review. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1...

I've been thinking about the ending of Sophia and the Sybil. It seemed like a really odd note to end on. I wanted to know more about why Cross tried to kill himself. And ending in the middle of a fight between Max and Sophia just seemed wrong. Then we get a "Finale" telling us they worked everything out. Was anyone else bothered by this?

[Nastasya]

Thanks for the recommendation, Casceil and Lily!

Yes, the ending was odd. I guess I didn't let it bother me for long because I often feel endings are a bit incomplete. It kind of fit in with the sometimes breezy, somewhat tongue-in-cheek narrative style. Maybe because Sophie and Max's relationship seemed to follow the same cycles, the author (or narrator?) found it unnecessary to follow it through again. But it's not uncommon that I'll find myself with just a few pages left of a book and think, Oh, it's one of THESE. There's no way this story will be genuinely resolved. A post-modern device, I guess?

[Hugh]

Thanks for all of your comments - I have enjoyed this discussion. As always the discussion threads will remain open indefinitely..

[Casceil]

Thanks for leading the discussion, Hugh. It must have been a little frustrating, with people reading the book at such different speeds.

[Lily]

Nastasya wrote: "Thanks for the recommendation, Casceil and Lily! ...."

Nastasya -- let me be clear. Casceil and I disagree about the value of spending time with Euphoria. If you are interested in an enjoyable read about the dynamics of some reasonably well developed characters (as in S&S), fine. If you want to learn more about the life of Margaret Mead, including some of the dysfunctional elements of her personal relationships, personally I recommend looking elsewhere.

[Lily]

Casceil wrote: "....I wanted to know more about why Cross tried to kill himself...."

I quite agree, Casceil!

@10, that was what I was trying to get at with "What about her impacted what happened in Venice." You are more careful, and clearer, with your words. Maybe Cross's actions were quite independent of Sybil.

[Lily]

Peter wrote: "Lily, while some writers may do it for sales, but really, I think the appeal from the writers' point of view with novels with historical characters is a chance to play with history and the people ..."

Interesting insight, Peter! Thanks! I've never had the daring to go there, even with the "play at it writing" I do. It has always seemed such an awesome responsibility -- with considerable risk of "fake news." And I have especially enjoyed Hilary Mantel's work and what she has had to say about historical fiction in her interviews.