Reading the Chunksters discussion
This topic is about
Seven Types of Ambiguity
Archive 2015: Literary Readathon
>
Seven Types of Ambiguity - Part Five
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Sarah
(new)
-
rated it 5 stars
Mar 13, 2015 07:59AM
So this week we finally have the view of Simon! It's about time.
reply
|
flag
I had an interesting reaction to Simon. Whenever he was on one of his annoying know-it-all rant/lectures I would get really annoyed with him. He even wrote Anna's essays! Or he says he did. But after I finished the section, I was thinking about him and realizing that aside from those rants, he's actually very insubstantial. Then I wondered if maybe that's why he rants, because he wants to be seen. Then I was thinking about how hard that would be to actually get across in writing! It's quite amazing.The piece where Simon is in prison and they have that guard, Mr. Greer, was actually both weird and interesting. I don't understand what it was that was so scary about him. It was vaguely hinted at and I missed the meaning.
Did anyone get the impression that at times even Simon thought he had Anna's permission to take Simon? There's certainly the justification. Sam was never in any danger from me. I was not the one abandoning him. This is just weird. A part of him actually seems to think that what he was doing was the best thing for her. That she would look at the situation, realize her marriage was a sham, and then realize that she needed him. As Anna says, Jesus, Simon! You can't take my son, for God's sake, and still claim some sort of moral superiority."
The part of the bail hearing where the dealer that he poured his soul out to was there to testify against him really made me laugh! He was awfully gullible.
Simon's faith in his superiority is highly annoying. Ales had also appealed to my sense of guilt. I am to Angelique what Anna is to me, only in Angelique's case it is more warranted. When I thanked him for flattering me he corrected me sharply. This is serious arrogance! I like the fact that Alex corrects him I am not flattering you, Simon. It's more warranted not because you're a worthier object of affection that Anna is. Thank you, Alex!
It's interesting that when William comes to see him, he actually says You always had ideas above your station This is an unbelievably horrible thing to say to your child. It's contemptuous and sanctimonious. And annoying. Simon says later Maybe my father recognized this? How had the youngest son come to have so questionable a future? Questions were an insult to him, an apostasy. Maybe that's why he hated me? I liked Alex's analysis of why Simon is the way he is (P402-403).
Actually, in this section I didn't think Alex seemed as unprofessional as in Alex's section. And "Simon, you can't for a moment think that this massive erosion of the common good can be blamed on people who keep journals." This was such a way of pointing out how ridiculous Simon's lecture was. And I like it when Alex points out that Anna was embarrassed of him in that lecture hall, and that she's a pragmatist. I think I liked Alex more than Simon. "Simon, will you concede that it's at least possible that you're so emotionally involved that your interpretation of what happened might not be entirely trustworthy?"
I could have honestly kissed Angela when she was called to testify! She managed to make that prosecutor's life hell even though she was technically answering the questions. Answering questions without answering questions takes some talent. Gina had stressed repeatedly that in criminal matters the burden of proof was always on the prosecution. Now Angelique had introduced the burden of empathy, and she had put it squarely on the magistrate. I don't get the impression that Angela is particularly intelligent but here she's masterful. I was frustrated that it mentioned her accident but didn't tell us what happened to her. I really hope we find out down the line because I want to know that she's okay.
Joe was definitely acting true to form when he was on the stand. Busy trying to place the blame for everything on someone else. And when May goes to his house he says something about how he lost his job and he's losing his house. All he has is his son! Seriously. Then maybe can actually make it to his birthday parties.
I was anxious to get to Simon's section but with such an impression of him being insubstantial I feel like it didn't actually resolve anything. I'm both exasperated and impressed with the author.
Sarah wrote: "The piece where Simon is in prison and they have that guard, Mr. Greer, was actually both weird and interesting. I don't understand what it was that was so scary about him. It was vaguely hinted at and I missed the meaning."Maybe I missed something too, but I was under the impression that whatever happened in the prison - the example given was some fight between two prisoners - it didn't matter what happened or who was at fault, everyone including the victim who got beat up, had to verbally confirm that everything was OK, there were no issues to be addressed, no fights were seen, etc. So he was intimidating in that he was supposed to be the guard, but really he didn't care what happened as long as peace was restored quickly.
And then add to that, Mr. Greer could very well be the facilitator of moving prisoners to where they weren't supposed to be - for example when the Turk is able to spend time in Simon's cell, when Simon's cell is supposed to be in an individual cell.
Sarah wrote: "Did anyone get the impression that at times even Simon thought he had Anna's permission to take Simon? There's certainly the justification. "Sam was never in any danger from me. I was not the one abandoning him." This is just weird. A part of him actually seems to think that what he was doing was the best thing for her."No, I don't think I got that impression. But definitely that Simon thought he was doing the best thing for Sam and Anna. THAT was odd. And there were times where even Simon expressed that he had to try and go back in time to when he was thinking that taking Sam had been a good idea. But then again, he would try and justify it, like he was living in the moment again. There seemed to be a waffling back and forth between him knowing it was wrong, but then thinking it was OK again.
Sarah wrote: "The part of the bail hearing where the dealer that he poured his soul out to was there to testify against him really made me laugh! He was awfully gullible."I know! It didn't dawn on me at the time that the other prisoner could possibly be a mole, but I was shaking my head at Simon telling this guy his life story!! I couldn't believe it.
He argued with a couple of people about how he had permission, like he believed it. His lawyer and his father I think. I thought maybe he was starting to believe it. That situation with his mother was so heartbreaking. It's interesting that she seems to see that he and Anna would not have been involved.
When he knew the cells were tapped!
Sarah wrote: "Simon's faith in his superiority is highly annoying."Completely! I'm still not sure what my overall feelings towards Simon are. They are definitely mixed. On the one hand, I cringe at his superiority moments like the scene you pointed out. But on the other hand, he is highly insecure and when I previously viewed Simon I didn't get this impression. It seemed he was always someone people wanted to be around and were comfortable with, he was intelligent and wanted to help children. Yes, he went off the deep-end when he began his stalking behavior and then kidnapped Sam, but he just seemed fixated on Anna, but not insecure. But his telling the story of him hiding in the closet and witnessing his mother with another woman, and the subsequent "shush-shush" of the entire incident in the family was heartbreaking for a child. He really felt isolated from his mother, when all he wanted was validation that he did not cause what had happened. And now I seem to be just rambling here...
Sarah wrote: "I liked Alex's analysis of why Simon is the way he is (P402-403)."Me too. I thought while reading this section "NOW we're getting somewhere with all this therapy!".
Exactly! Alex was finally showing some skill.Did you get the same feeling I did that Simon was somewhat insubstantial?
Sarah wrote: "I could have honestly kissed Angela when she was called to testify! She managed to make that prosecutor's life hell even though she was technically answering the questions. Answering questions without answering questions takes some talent....I don't get the impression that Angela is particularly intelligent but here she's masterful. I was frustrated that it mentioned her accident but didn't tell us what happened to her."Yes, I was impressed as well with Angela's answers. I was also surprised because I also didn't gather that she was all that intelligent, but I guess there are all different sorts of intelligence. I know if I were in that situation, I would definitely get confused, crack under the pressure, and say something I shouldn't have. But I can do math OK. :)
When Angela's accident was mentioned I was shocked and was hoping that she was OK. But then I remembered (I think?) that we were told from Mitch's story that she had been in an accident. We are just left wondering what exactly happened and if she is OK.
Sarah wrote: "I was anxious to get to Simon's section but with such an impression of him being insubstantial I feel like it didn't actually resolve anything. I'm both exasperated and impressed with the author."No, nothing is resolved at all. I thought I would have some sort of resolution after hearing Simon's POV, but I don't have anything but anxiousness to continue the story.
Also, I reread the synopsis of the book and realized that there are only 6 narrators even though there are 7 parts. I wonder who is going to narrate a second time? Are we going to go full-circle back to Alex?
Sarah wrote: "He argued with a couple of people about how he had permission, like he believed it. His lawyer and his father I think. I thought maybe he was starting to believe it."Oh yeah, but I thought Alex had told him that his lawyer couldn't know that he actually did it because then she wouldn't be able to defend him. And as for his father, I thought he just wanted to "keep up appearances" and not let his father think that his son was a crazy failure. I would have to go back and reread to see if I missed any indication that he might start believing his cover story.
It's not Alex. I glanced at it but I don't want to spoiler it. I think it's really more of a 100 page epilogue. I'm incredibly curious and dying to reach the end.
The lawyer thing was interesting. Here they can't support perjury but this sounded like she couldn't represent him in a not guilty plea unless he really wasn't. Omg, could you believe "Your Worship" for the judge? I just about died. What an awful thing to have to say.
Sarah wrote: "Did you get the same feeling I did that Simon was somewhat insubstantial?"Do you mean that he is insubstantial as a worthy individual? He seems to have many ideas of how a society should be run (similar to Alex's healthcare for the common good goal), which ideas should be taught (the English department, for example), concern for children's well-being, all of these ideals. But besides being a teacher for a short time, he really hasn't done anything but fixate on the past and pity himself for what he used to have (Anna, his teaching job), but no longer does. He also thinks about how he and his mother could be closer than they are, but has he ever tried actually having a conversation with her and talk about what is bothering him? He is an adult now, after all. And like Anna had brought up, has he ever participated in demonstrations or things like that to stand up for what he believes in? I don't think so, he seems to just bad-mouth anything anyone ever does. He also says how nobody calls his apartment or visits him. That he doesn't have any friends (besides Anna! that was weird...).
Is this what you mean? Or am I totally off base of what you were thinking of?
Sarah wrote: "It's not Alex. I glanced at it but I don't want to spoiler it. I think it's really more of a 100 page epilogue. I'm incredibly curious and dying to reach the end."Ah, that was my other thought.
Well, I would be up for combining the last two sections if others want to? Or not exactly combining them, but just opening up each thread earlier than we had initially planned. This book is a quick read.
Sarah wrote: "Omg, could you believe "Your Worship" for the judge? I just about died. What an awful thing to have to say."Ha! I know! I thought it was a joke at first, then realized that is how they must address judges in Australia. I couldn't stop giggling, though. :)
Well, I would be up for combining the last two sections if others want to?I would be happy with that. Everybody is reading it at different paces and I want to finally finish it :) Maybe I could open section 6 on Tues and section 7 on Fri?
Okay, so he wasn't insubstantial to you :) When I went to think back on him in this part, I remembered the rants and his weird obsession with Anna, but it was like I didn't have a mental grip on who he was. I could not have listed all of those things you mentioned. I'm seeing him as he is defined by other people but not as an individual in his own right.I couldn't stop giggling, though. :)
Exactly! And the snotty American in me was saying "I couldn't say that! I worship no one!"
Sarah wrote: "Maybe I could open section 6 on Tues and section 7 on Fri?"That would work for me.
Sarah wrote: "Okay, so he wasn't insubstantial to you :) When I went to think back on him in this part, I remembered the rants and his weird obsession with Anna, but it was like I didn't have a mental grip on w..."OK, I get your point now. I wasn't quite sure what you meant.
Exactly! And the snotty American in me was saying "I couldn't say that! I worship no one!"
lol. I was trying to imagine how us saying "Your Honor" would sound to other people, it might sound just as odd.
It probably would. It's funny how things are so ingrained that you don't think of them. Right after my absolute indignance over Worship, I thought about Honor and kind of deflated. I wonder what they use in England?
Looks like it depends on the court? My Lord/My Lady for High Court, Your Honour for Circuit judges.And it looks like in Australia since 2007 they switched to Your Honour too.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judge
That's interesting. I wonder why they changed it.
Linda wrote: "Sarah wrote: "Maybe I could open section 6 on Tues and section 7 on Fri?"That would work for me."
Sarah wrote: "Well, I would be up for combining the last two sections if others want to?
I would be happy with that. Everybody is reading it at different paces and I want to finally finish it :) Maybe I could..."
Sure, I would like to put it to bed...I'm game for next Tues and Friday.
Simon feels insubstantial as a character, you put it very well, Sarah. By this I mean that his memories aren't really true. He doesn't have a past of his own, or rather his memories have been overwritten by an idealised version of his past. He's been thinking so long about a few short moments that happened many years ago that he managed to lose the truth altogether. For the first time I thought Anna was right to leave him because she couldn't have possibly lived up to his expectations, he loved just the idea of her and not the normal person she was. Of course I'm extremely curious as to the next chapter and will start reading it immediately. Also, I got the feeling during this section (just as in Dennis section before) that somehow this book constitutes a social satire. After all, isn't it absurd that Simon is imprisoned for a year and a half virtually for nothing and has to pass his days among the worst criminals, murderers and rapists? After all, we all know that in essence he's innocent, he could have done no harm but there is no way he can explain himself in modern society. Actually, the absurd accusations made by tabloids make it impossible for him to stand a fair trial.
Also, I've been wondering since Simon has serious mental problems, why don't they try to say that the incident was caused by some momentary mental breakdown?
I somehow missed that it's been a year and a half. I think this is a difficult point just because the law actually has to be unambiguous. They can't read all of those fine nuances into every case. It is difficult though, because he wouldn't have hurt him. I've also been very curious about the mental incompetency thing. Surely Australia has a similar concept? Maybe the lawyer can't file that because Simon continues to insist he had permission?
Teanka wrote: "After all, isn't it absurd that Simon is imprisoned for a year and a half virtually for nothing and has to pass his days among the worst criminals, murderers and rapists?"I noticed the year and a half time lapse and I was appalled. But I didn't really question it since the judicial system seems to work extremely slowly. Even so, a year and a half was completely excessive. I did think that it was insane that for what he did, he was housed among the worst of the worst. Just because his case involved a child, there was no sliding scale to what actually happened. And the media just made me extremely angry.
Simon feels insubstantial as a character, you put it very well, Sarah. By this I mean that his memories aren't really true. He doesn't have a past of his own, or rather his memories have been overwritten by an idealised version of his past.
I see what you're saying, Teanka. You described this very well.
Sarah wrote: "Maybe the lawyer can't file that because Simon continues to insist he had permission? "That's a good point. However, I'd still like to read about some discussion about the line of defense in the book.
Linda, I was very curious about Simon's chapter (weren't we all?) and when I started reading, I realized there was no new information about the past (or very little) that he could provide us with. It was very strange.
I can see where the author was trying to move the story forward, but you're right, this is odd. The only bits of the past we get are what he says to Alex. There are very few of them.Up until this section, haven't most of the sections been like this? More about what's happening at the moment?
Up until this section, haven't most of the sections been like this? More about what's happening at the moment? ."Well I could argue that Dennis' section also told us about his upbringing and past first, so there was some personal information on Mitch there. And of course the first section introduced us to the entire story and there were glimpses of Simon's past too. We know Angelique's circumstances from section 3, so to me Simon's section was the one most focused on the present.
I'm reading the 6. part now, but nowhere near its end yet, I don't have enough time for reading.
I thought the most interesting thing about Dennis' section was that he was telling his story but it wasn't really his POV because we never saw what he was thinking. It was really just a dialogue minus a POV. It was strange.I think if we had had more of Simon's past it would have made him feel less insubstantial to me.
