Q & A with Emma Donoghue discussion
Character of Ma
message 51:
by
Laura
(new)
Mar 22, 2011 08:46AM
I loved that we never knew what Ma's real name was. Along with Jack's other quirks and funny dialogue, I thought it was just cute. I know my cousin found it ever so strange when she realised our grandma had a different name - I figured it was the same here!
reply
|
flag
I have a friend who is a minister. She recently wrote a sermon about motherhood and in it she mentioned that when a woman dies her children, even as adults are often unable to conceive of her as a full person. She was...Mom. Her hobbies were cooking and driving kids to soccer practice. She liked going to school plays and soccer games. My minister friend often has to ask for the contact information for one of the mother's friends to get enough personal information to deliver a proper eulogy. Given all that, Jack's narrow view of his mother, though regrettable, seems like human nature.
Mod
Well spotted. I did try to think of a name for her and they all sounded wrong. Finally I figured out that that was because the Jack in my head was resolutely saying no to all of them - refusing to give her any other name but Ma.
Emma wrote: "I did try to think of a name for her and they all sounded wrong."For Ma to not have been silenced or trivialized, she really needed a name, even if it was heard in passing by one of her parents calling her or something. This lack of identity because of the limited POV saddened me.
Adrianna wrote: "Emma wrote: "I did try to think of a name for her and they all sounded wrong."For Ma not have been silenced or trivialized, she really needed a name, even if it was heard in passing by one of her..."
On the contary, I found it enlightening. Jack's limited POV is what added to my enjoyment of the book. Ma's name isn't needed for the topic to be considered important. I believe it would be against the characterisation of Jack to acknowledge her real name. Ma's identity throughout the novel was established only by what Jack was aware of.
Laura wrote: "Ma's identity throughout the novel was established only by what Jack was aware of."I saw this as a major flaw of the novel.
Also, there was plenty of information happening around Jack that he didn't understand/acknowledge. Someone mentioning Ma's name would not have necessarily taken away from Jack's POV.
Hmm, interesting ... I thought it made perfect sense. I don't quite see how it's a flaw. Everything else is taking us AWAY from Ma's perspective - giving us what we know of her through Jack's eyes. I don't see it as trivializing, because her character is the image in his eyes - and couldn't be more important than being Ma. (Not saying that if she was a real human being, there wouldn't be other parts of her that he wasn't aware of, but that's not the point of THIS particular novel.)Yes, I can see how her name being mentioned wouldn't have taken away from his perspective, but I also don't see how it would be necessary, or that it would've added anything of much value to the story.
We as readers are frustrated by not being able to label Ma, and we may feel this makes her lack an identity. This parallels Ma's sense of loss of self and difficulty in figuring who she is and who she can be outside of Room.
I belived that the name would take away Jack's characterisation and narration. In the same way he referred to objects as people, in the same way he tried to reject all things that weren't in Room (shoes, for example), I felt like Jack didn't want to know Ma's other name. She didn't have that name in Room so she shouldn't have that name now, kind of thing. To me, the novel being written in Jack's point of view is my favourite feature, not a flaw. It's the reason I enjoyed it so much.
Ma's identity in this novel has been established; she is Jack's mother. Like Kaliki said, of course there were other parts to Ma but that's not the point of this particular novel.
Kaliki wrote: "Hmm, interesting ... I thought it made perfect sense. I don't quite see how it's a flaw. Everything else is taking us AWAY from Ma's perspective - giving us what we know of her through Jack's eyes....(Not saying that if she was a real human being, there wouldn't be other parts of her that he wasn't aware of, but that's not the point of THIS particular novel.)"Very good points, Kaliki, and perhaps that is my overall dissatisfaction with the novel. I felt that the story HAD to be more about Ma purely because of the content, subject matter, and context of the real life experiences that inspired the novel (or at least had to give her more of a focus than was provided). Her character was just as important as Jack's, and it wasn't highlighted enough for me. It seemed unjust to the real victims out there to not give Ma more of a role/voice. However, I do agree that it sounds like that wasn't the point/intention of this particular novel.
Robbie wrote: "We as readers are frustrated by not being able to label Ma, and we may feel this makes her lack an identity. This parallels Ma's sense of loss of self and difficulty in figuring who she is and who she can be outside of Room."Very good observation, Robbie! I hadn't considered that connection before.
Adrianna wrote: "Kaliki wrote: "Hmm, interesting ... I thought it made perfect sense. I don't quite see how it's a flaw. Everything else is taking us AWAY from Ma's perspective - giving us what we know of her throu..."I can certainly understand that dissatisfaction. I think someone earlier in the thread said something about 'craving' more of Ma's perspective, and that makes sense. Perhaps that's part of the intrigue of the book, in that we don't get what we're so used to getting in other stories, so we long for it.
I agree that her character was just as important as Jack's. But because of the unique voice from a developmentally un/underdeveloped personality of a 5 yr old, who of course is still self-centered and hasn't learned that Ma is someone other than his, to be there to serve his needs... we don't get to see the complete and complex person that she is.
Kaliki wrote: "Perhaps that's part of the intrigue of the book, in that we don't get what we're so used to getting in other stories, so we long for it. "Yes, I agree. To add to that, I think that's part of the intrigue when we read about cases similar to the Fritzls. We can't help wondering what must be going through the mind of the confined woman, how she coped with everything, and indeed, how does anyone live under such abusive and despairing conditions for so long? We can read, research and in some cases even talk to the women, but can we really imagine ourselves in their situation? Put ourselves mentally in their shoes? I think the character of Jack is supposed to represent us, who approach and slowly realize the horror of Ma's situation from a relatively innocent perspective. I don't think that trivializes the character of Ma, any more than our difficulty in understanding the situation of women like Elisabeth Fritzl trivializes them.
Kaliki wrote: "I agree that her character was just as important as Jack's. But because of the unique voice from a developmentally un/underdeveloped personality of a 5 yr old, who of course is still self-centered and hasn't learned that Ma is someone other than his, to be there to serve his needs... we don't get to see the complete and complex person that she is."Again, this is where I find a flaw with the novel/presentation. There should have been a way to present more of Ma's character, especially since she was so important, regardless of the age of Jack. Other important information was presented in a way that Jack the character didn't understand but that the reader was able to understand, such as the dangers of Old Nick and why Ma didn't want Jack to eat the candy that was brought for him. Jack didn't understand a lot of what was going on, but it was written in a way, and with our adult knowledge, that WE understood what the author was hinting at/implying. The same should have been attempted with Ma's character or at least done in a better manner.
Mosaic wrote: "We can't help wondering what must be going through the mind of the confined woman, how she coped with everything, and indeed, how does anyone live under such abusive and despairing conditions for so long? We can read, research and in some cases even talk to the women, but can we really imagine ourselves in their situation? Put ourselves mentally in their shoes? I think the character of Jack is supposed to represent us, who approach and slowly realize the horror of Ma's situation from a relatively innocent perspective. I don't think that trivializes the character of Ma, any more than our difficulty in understanding the situation of women like Elisabeth Fritzl trivializes them."You asked some really interesting/important questions, Mosaic. I agree that the choice of Jack as a narrator was supposed to give people who have not experienced this type of horror insight into what this experience might have been like without undermining the real cases in which this has happened. It's true that there is no way to understand what it was like unless we had gone through the same thing, so picking Jack as the main character/POV was an apt choice.
Still, the way this character/POV was presented left a lot lacking concerning what I felt the real message of the novel was (or at least should have been): the sexual, physical, and emotional abuse and captivity of women AND the dangers facing children born in captivity. The two issues are very connected, and should be given equal play in the novel. However, this type of female abuse cannot be expressed very well through a male, child's voice. It would have taken a more clever approach to writing this story and Jack's narrative voice to present this information about Ma's character and experiences in a way that would have done Ma's character justice.
Upon further reflection, I see this novel as skirting that issue for fear of insulting or not doing justice to the real life victims. Instead, the novel focuses on how one mother saves her son from captivity of a room.
It's funny, because I'm having a reaction to a couple of your comments and I'm trying to figure out why. Saying that it is a flaw, or that it should've been done another way comes across as you knowing better than the author how the story should've been told. But it's her story.I'm not trying to say you shouldn't have an opinion about it, we all do. This is obviously the kind of book that affects us all deeply, and each in our own unique way based on our own unique background.
I didn't find any fault in that kind of information missing in this book. I have found that in other books that I've read, but I consider that my opinion about the story, not a flaw in how it's written.
i think that using the device of the character jack does trivialise the trauma of ma. i agree that he is meant to sort-of represent us, the reader (though this does also make me wonder if we are being treated like children? and given a version of a horrible story that is easier for us to take?)
but if jack is a door, he is a door that doesn't enter into ma's mind. he is a door into a voyeuristic position, not a doorway into understanding the impact of this situation on ma.
i think that using a child narrator for a book with this subject matter allows the reader to not have to really think about and feel about what we are really reading/talking about.
he doesn't understand it, so we are excused from understanding it too. he minimises it (because he doesn't understand it, and because she protects him), so we are implicitly being given persmission to minismise with him.
he speaks instead of her. he chooses what we see and hear of her. to me, that is part of what it means to be silenced. he is, in a way, an ideal censor, for we can't blame him for the omissions we'd blame an adult for, and yet he omits much the same content as we find omitted when we read about other survivors...he omits what most people don't want to hear a victim/survivor say.
he protects us from her words, her cries, her howls, her screams, her self expression about the impact of the violence of her experiences on her. we don't feel what it's like to be ma outside of her role as a mother. she is being silenced around her trauma.
and all throughout, it's like we know in a background way she is being raped, but we as readers are given an out. we don't need to really feel it.
i think that this ends up acting like/being just another rape myth. rape becomes an empty word. and the reader can comfortably focus on what a great mother ma is, and how resilient she is. and one of the implications is that being raped and raped and raped isn't really so bad, isn't the kind of visceral torturous and haunting experience it's make it out to be, because look at the beauty that can come out of it, if you just allow it to.
i found this to be another angle on victim blaming. not blaming ma for being raped, but blaming rape survivors for the extent of their post traumatic stress. blaming the victims for the way they experience their trauma after it is over can be just as harmful as blaming women explicitly for the rape itself.
and if this is not at least significantly ma's story, then, to me, i don't understand how this is any way respectful to the female victims/survivors.
@kaliki,i just wanted to point out that though i agree with you that we are all speaking our opinions, i believ that adrianna is clear on this point too. she is describing the way she sees it.
adrianna said for example-
Again, this is where I find a flaw with the novel/presentation.
I understand completely what you are saying, Emilie.. and Adrianna. I've been an advocate, I've worked in a rape crisis center, I've volunteered at a domestic violence shelter. I get it. We ARE protected from all of those things by the point of view as this book is written. For me, it was a refreshing change.I guess what I am saying is that just because you, or Adrianna, or me, or whoever doesn't like it, doesn't mean that it is wrong, which is what is being stated...by both of you, in my opinion.
This is a piece of fiction. A genius work that gives a different perspective than anything we've seen before. It is not intended to give a voice to victims of rape. (At least I don't believe so, given the explanations and responses by the author. I could be wrong.) There are many, many wonderful works out there that do just that. This one is different, intentionally.
An author writing fiction has no obligation or responsibility to real-life people, other than to try and entertain them, and perhaps provoke some thought and discussion, which is exactly what this piece of fiction has done.
I am not trying to defend the book (well, maybe I am) nor the author (she's here to defend herself if she chooses). I do find it interesting that people would be so bold as to make statements of how a book "should've" been written. If that's how you feel, perhaps you should write a book yourself. This is her work of art. It's one thing to dislike it, it's another to call it wrong.
The author has been generous of her time to set up this thread to discuss the book with the readers. I think telling her she's wrong and should've written her book differently is quite rude. That's simply my opinion. You don't have to agree with it.
I didn't get the impression that Ma was very resilient at all. Ma expressed, in her own words, that she found things easier in the room, in some ways. This is a testiment to how hard it is for her to live in the outside world, without the routines she established to create a wall around herself and keep her emotions suppressed. We saw her be "gone" several times, indicating that she freezes/withdraws when confronted with her emotions. Not all of us are screamers and howlers. Don't get me wrong, I think I would have liked the book more, if more points of view were told in parallel, but I think Emma's way of revealing Ma's experience is effective.
Well said, Kaliki. Room is what it is. It's a story from Jack's perspective. It's not the whole story, but it's the story Emma Donoghue chose to tell.
Adrianna wrote: "However, this type of female abuse cannot be expressed very well through a male, child's voice. "Adrianna, if you don't mind, could you elaborate on why you think a male child voice wasn't the right medium to express female abuse? Would it have been more effective for you if the author had used the pov of a female child? Or not a child at all?
Interested wrote: "not sure if this was mentioned yet, but i noticed that we never actually learned Ma's name throughout the book. Jack always referred to it as Ma's other name. I thought that was interesting."This is a question I had as well. I was wondering if it was intentionally left out and why?
I thought the possible "escape plans" that ma had, the screaming game and flicking the light on and off during the night were very clever, both the idea of them and how they were written. What made you think to use these ideas and where did the actual escape plan come from because I was shocked when Jack had to play dead rolled up in a rug!
Excellent discussions, everyone, and a lot to respond to! I'll do my best to address each issue in its own response.Kaliki wrote: "It's funny, because I'm having a reaction to a couple of your comments and I'm trying to figure out why. Saying that it is a flaw, or that it should've been done another way comes across as you kno..."
Kaliki, I am a writer, reviewer, and critical thinker. Part of how I interpret literature is by questioning content and examining the writing. In my opinion, this writing was not strong enough for the content. Of course, there are many that disagree with me. No writer expects to please everyone, which Donoghue stated in another thread, but I see no reason to refrain from a civil discussion, especially since I am learning more about the book as well as my reaction to it because of this Q&A group. It's been very enlightening.
Emilie, I agree with a lot of what you said and feel the same way, which is why I asked Donoghue in another thread whether or not this novel was intended for a YA audience. I haven't received a response yet, or at least not the last time I checked. I know she explained her audience focus a bit, so maybe that was the answer. Not sure. Emilie wrote: "but if jack is a door, he is a door that doesn't enter into ma's mind. he is a door into a voyeuristic position, not a doorway into understanding the impact of this situation on ma."
This is where I felt the writing was lacking. If the writing had been stronger, Jack could have shown more of ma's mind without compromising his position as a child narrator.
Emilie wrote: "he speaks instead of her. he chooses what we see and hear of her. to me, that is part of what it means to be silenced. he is, in a way, an ideal censor, for we can't blame him for the omissions we'd blame an adult for, and yet he omits much the same content as we find omitted when we read about other survivors...he omits what most people don't want to hear a victim/survivor say."
I agree, which is where I feel the silencing comes into play. Ma was an outside character in the novel, always on the peripheral making it easier to ignore her while we focused on Jack.
Emilie wrote: "and if this is not at least significantly ma's story, then, to me, i don't understand how this is any way respectful to the female victims/survivors."
Again, I agree. By default, this had to be as equally Ma's story as Jack's. Unfortunately, it wasn't.
Kaliki wrote: "This is a piece of fiction. A genius work that gives a different perspective than anything we've seen before. It is not intended to give a voice to victims of rape. (At least I don't believe so, given the explanations and responses by the author. I could be wrong.) There are many, many wonderful works out there that do just that. This one is different, intentionally."It is true that this piece is not meant to give a voice to victims of rape. I came into the story expecting one thing and came out not understanding fully why I was so disappointed. This is Jack's story.
Kaliki wrote: "An author writing fiction has no obligation or responsibility to real-life people, other than to try and entertain them, and perhaps provoke some thought and discussion, which is exactly what this piece of fiction has done."
Again, very true. I misunderstood how much she based the book off the real life case. I really expected a fictional retelling of what I was reading in the news. To be honest, I'm disappointed by the angle she took. However, lots of people enjoyed it, and she did provoke thought, discussion, and awareness, which is very important. Overall, I've been very pleased with the comments being made by readers in this Q&A group though I found the novel unsatisfying.
Mosaic wrote: "Adrianna, if you don't mind, could you elaborate on why you think a male child voice wasn't the right medium to express female abuse? Would it have been more effective for you if the author had used the pov of a female child? Or not a child at all?"I have no problem with you asking, Mosaic. You have some very thought-provoking questions I hadn't previously considered.
I don't necessarily have a problem with the POV, but I do think using a male child's voice was a more difficult writing approach if an author intended to depict Ma's experiences as well as Jack's. Originally, this is what I thought Donoghue attempted, but the more I read her responses and the more people discuss the novel with me, the clearer it is that this story was never about Ma. It was about Jack.
Having a male voice describe female sexual abuse unnerves me for some reason regardless of the age of the speaker. It's a complicated feeling that I still haven't formulated into a clear concrete thought. If I can explain it more fully later on, I will be sure to email you or post another comment in here.
I hadn't considered a female child POV, but it would have been interesting for Ma to have a shining female knight to rescue her rather than perpetuating the myth that a "man" needs to save a woman from this type of a situation. Of course, I'm sure Donoghue had her reasons for choosing the male child, perhaps because she didn't want child sexual abuse complicating the story, if Old Nick's character leaned that way. This is actually a great question to pose to the author.
Emma Donoghue: Why did you choose a male child rather than a female child to tell the story of "Room?"
Emilie wrote: "he doesn't understand it, so we are excused from understanding it too. he minimises it (because he doesn't understand it, and because she protects him), so we are implicitly being given persmission to minismise with him..." I agree.
"...he speaks instead of her. he chooses what we see and hear of her. to me, that is part of what it means to be silenced. he is, in a way, an ideal censor, for we can't blame him for the omissions we'd blame an adult for, and yet he omits much the same content as we find omitted when we read about other survivors...he omits what most people don't want to hear a victim/survivor say..."
I agree.
"...he protects us from her words, her cries, her howls, her screams, her self expression about the impact of the violence of her experiences on her. we don't feel what it's like to be ma outside of her role as a mother. she is being silenced around her trauma..."
I agree.
These comments are so pure and brilliant, intelligent and insightful. Thank you.
This particular thread is fascinating to me. I was much more struck by what the book did do, in terms of Ma. It seems to me that one of the worst things about begin a victim of rape is that you feel as though you have one story. Jack's existence allows Ma to have another story. She can't escape the story that she is a victim of rape, not even when she leaves Room; but raising Jack is another story that exists along side of her prisoner/victim of rape story. So while I agree with those who claim that this is Jack's story, I also see it as the story of a mother. The facts of kidnapping and rape are a scrim through which the reader reads the entire story. And we DO know more than Jack does. There are so many ways in which we realize more than Jack's POV gives us directly. It worked for me as a reader. I totally disagree that this POV allowed me to minimize Ma's experiences. Rather, it gave me a new and unusual lens through which to see her character. As a victim of rape, one of the worst things for me was the feeling that this would always be my story, the most defining one. That hasn't been true for me. In my mind, Ma survives because she becomes a mother. She says as much after their escape. So she is able to let both of these stories--rape victim/mother exist simultaneously. Of course, Jack cares only about Ma's story as a mother. I see this novel as enormously hopeful, a novel that enlarges my own humanity...which is what I'm really looking for in literature, even when my initial impulse may be entertainment. The impulse to hear Ma's version of her abuse feels to me like the impulse of the reporter. "No, we want to hear THAT story," the reporter seemed to be saying. I'm glad to have read the one Emma Donaghue wrote.
Nicola wrote: "I think that fact that Ma was so easily drawn in by the "lost dog" story is the first defining characteristic of Ma. She was young, innocent and gullible. Nothing, and noone, has helped her grow ..."I agree with you 100%, she was young and living in a world totally different from the one she found when released. She was able to mature in Room but once Room was gone, that maturity was also gone. She needed to discover what was left of herself once her world vanished. For her to put aside her own needs for Jack wouldn't have helped either one. To be a good mother, you need to be able to also take care of yourself and she simply couldn't do it until the end of the book.
As far as the breastfeeding goes, like Ma says, she never had to ween him. Most mothers ween because either they go back to work and pumping is too hard, they want time alone, they need more sleep...Ma never had those issues. She also needed the closeness that nursing offers. Nursing doesn't just make a baby calm, it also calms the mother in a stressful situation. She needed physical and emotional closeness and nursing provided that. I agree also with the fact that she needed to know that Jack would get the nutrition he needed but feel that is too superficial of a reason to continue nursing into his 5th year.
Her suicide attempt added so much to her character. When seen through Jack's eyes, you never see what a nightmare she has lived through. That scene really reminded me that Room was not the safe haven for her that it was for Jack. She make Room wonderful for Jack so he didn't have to live the horror she did. She made life better for him because of the depth of love she had for him. She even took it so far as to not resist Old Nick so Jack wouldn't be terrified while Old Nick was there.
Imagine the strength it would take to allow a man to rape you for years, in order to protect your child. To never lash out, to never fight back...all for your child. Then imagine waking up after being raped and playing with your baby all day, never having even a second to yourself (well, unless you count when she was "Gone"). She really did an amazing job. And, still on top of all this, she taught him to read and write, taught him religion and games, gave him things to look forward to and created toys from garbage.
Ma is an extraordinary character.
Mod
I saw this as a major flaw of the novel.
Also, there was plenty of information happening around ..."
True, Jack can report plenty of information that he doesn't understand - IF he has no reason to block it. In the case of Ma's name, he goes out of his way not to say it: it's a silent protest. My own kids, by contrast, generally call me Emma.
Mod
You raise an interesting point here: the part the reader's unsatisfied 'cravings' play in the experience of reading a novel. I hope it doesn't sound too much like a Mum-knows-best to say that I don't think readers should always get all the cake they want... for instance, readers have often asked me for more information about what happens after the last page of my novels, but for me it's a mark of success if the reader is left slightly haunted, trying to figure out for themselves what the book didn't spell out, either during the story or after it... Not everyone will agree of course, and I don't mean to actually frustrate you: there's a fine line between tantalising and irritating, and there are plenty of novels I've tossed aside myself because I can't figure out what's going on.
Mod
It was strange, planning ROOM made me take turns putting myself into the mindset of both Old Nick and Ma: an uncomfortable alternation! Thinking like Old Nick, I decided on the construction of the building, 'shopped' for security mess, cheap furniture, etc; weighed up whether or not to 'give' them TV, books... Then, thinking like Ma, I plotted every possible way to get out, weighed up the risks of each... Of course all my sympathies were with Ma, but to write the book realistically I had to spend an uncomfortable amount of time in the head of a sociopath, making his careful preparations.
Re: the escape, where I was living in France while I wrote ROOM, there was a shabby old Persian-style rug on the floor, so that probably put it into my head. But I would have come up with the idea of a fake death anyway, both because it is a literary tradition and because I liked the idea of Jack having to 'die' in Room to be reborn on the Outside.
Mod
Adrianna, I must have missed your YA question on another strand, sorry. I did write ROOM with an open mind as to whether it would be published for adults or YA; I imagined readers from about 11 up. The publishers thought it should be aimed at adults, but I notice it's been recommended as a YA-interest novel by, for instance, the American Library Association, so it does seem to be reaching teenagers.
Re: Ma, this is a very interesting discussion and raises meaty issues both artistically and ethically. I suppose I felt that one thing worth trying, in a novel about a woman who has been raped for seven years, was to keep the focus off rape - to follow Ma's own insistence that 'raped' is not her main identity. That's not a statement I'm making about all women who've been raped; it's just one story. I can see that for some of you, that decision stunts the book. But I do think, given the way most reviews and blogs devote a great deal of attention to Ma's experience and feelings, that she is being heard.
Mod
Good question, I've answered it very fully on another thread. I should be able to tell you which one, but I'm afraid these discussions are coming so thick and fast I've lost track of what's where...
Mod
One more comment about Ma's character: for me, getting this right was the greatest challenge in the novel. Of course it's much easier to have a character speak directly; it creates sympathy in the reader, no matter who the speaker is. (A good example is Iago in Shakespeare's OTHELLO - his speeches are so well written, we like him even while he's plotting horrors.) But in the case of Ma, I wanted to make the reader work to know her, like the way the police have to work to find her. Readers have to peer past Jack, using not only all the hints he gives us (sighs of pain, flashes of irritation, details mentioned that he doesn't understand) but our own guesswork about what her life in Room must be like. The result, if the book works, is that Ma comes to matter very much to readers because she is hard-won, partly their own creation; they've put their own fears and powers into her. But of course it doesn't work for everybody. On the question of writing a novel to give a voice to survivors of rape, I would say that no, that was not my focus on this occasion. But I was trying to do something else: create a memorable character who is, among other things, a survivor of rape.
Emma wrote: "I hope it doesn't sound too much like a Mum-knows-best to say that I don't think readers should always get all the cake they want...but for me it's a mark of success if the reader is left slightly haunted, ...there's a fine line between tantalising and irritating, ..."That's exactly what I felt about it, and I thought it was done brilliantly. The books that stay with me and keep me thinking are those that don't spell everything out for me. I like the phrase Jane used above .. instead of the "reporter" version, you allow the reader to use imagination, or to plug in characteristics of victims we may know or even be ourselves. Also, reading Jane's comments, it gives the feeling of this being a very freeing concept for the reader.
Jane wrote: " see this novel as enormously hopeful, a novel that enlarges my own humanity...which is what I'm really looking for in literature, even when my initial impulse may be entertainment. ..."Thank you for sharing your perspective Jane. You've opened my eyes even further to the depths of the story and this character.
Emma wrote: "True, Jack can report plenty of information that he doesn't understand - IF he has no reason to block it. In the case of Ma's name, he goes out of his way not to say it: it's a silent protest. My own kids, by contrast, generally call me Emma."I didn't realize he was blocking this information. I didn't get any indication that Jack was purposefully not saying his Ma's name because he had blocked that information. Are you implying that this was the reason you didn't give her a name? How can it be a silent protest when he is blocking her name? It seems counter-productive.
Thanks for the tidbit about your kids too! Nice contrast.
Emma wrote: "Good question, I've answered it very fully on another thread. I should be able to tell you which one, but I'm afraid these discussions are coming so thick and fast I've lost track of what's where..."Thanks for trying. I hear you! It's easy to get lost in all the discussion threads. I'll do my best to wander around again to locate this answer.
Do any of the participants in this thread know where this information is located? I'm specifically looking for a discussion on why Donoghue used a male child to narrate the novel rather than a female child. Thanks for the help! If I locate it on my own, I'll let everyone know!
Emma wrote: "You raise an interesting point here: the part the reader's unsatisfied 'cravings' play in the experience of reading a novel. I hope it doesn't sound too much like a Mum-knows-best to say that I don't think readers should always get all the cake they want..."I know what you mean, but I wouldn't say my disappointment was an unsatisfied "craving." I would say that the novel didn't live up to my expectations.
Emma wrote: "for instance, readers have often asked me for more information about what happens after the last page of my novels, but for me it's a mark of success if the reader is left slightly haunted, trying to figure out for themselves what the book didn't spell out, either during the story or after it..."
I agree with you-- definitely a mark of success if a reader is haunted after finishing a novel, wanting to know even more. You've succeeded in doing this with a lot of readers, so I commend you on that success. Unfortunately, this was not the case for me and perhaps a minority of other readers that were left disappointed.
Emma wrote: "One more comment about Ma's character: for me, getting this right was the greatest challenge in the novel. Of course it's much easier to have a character speak directly; it creates sympathy in the reader, no matter who the speaker is. (A good example is Iago in Shakespeare's OTHELLO - his speeches are so well written, we like him even while he's plotting horrors.) But in the case of Ma, I wanted to make the reader work to know her, like the way the police have to work to find her. Readers have to peer past Jack, using not only all the hints he gives us (sighs of pain, flashes of irritation, details mentioned that he doesn't understand) but our own guesswork about what her life in Room must be like. The result, if the book works, is that Ma comes to matter very much to readers because she is hard-won, partly their own creation; they've put their own fears and powers into her. But of course it doesn't work for everybody.Great points made here, Emma, about the role of readers in creating characters. Isn't this a similar argument that Stephanie Myer made regarding criticisms about the lack of character details of her main star Bella? I'm not sure I agree with this writing method, but I could see how it works for certain readers.
However, I didn't think Jack presented enough hints for us to get to know her, which is where I feel the narrative perspective was lacking.
I would argue, though, that Ma would matter regardless of what information was presented through Jack. She was the other victim of Room and Old Nick as well as a mother. These are characteristics that make her matter regardless of how vague her character is. This is why there are some of us disappointed with the novel-- because her character mattered that much, and we feel that her story wasn't properly addressed in a way we felt it needed to be. In my case, I expected the story to be equally about Ma and Jack, but I've come to realize that the story was mostly about Jack (as stated by you in another thread), with Ma playing a supporting role in his trials. I don't know what others expected who felt similarly as me.
Fiona, Emilie: Any thoughts?
Emma wrote: "Of course all my sympathies were with Ma, but to write the book realistically I had to spend an uncomfortable amount of time in the head of a sociopath, making his careful preparations."How much research did you do when trying to create the villain of Old Nick? I'm not sure if you answered this question in another thread or not, but you've sparked my curiosity.
Emma wrote: "Adrianna, I must have missed your YA question on another strand, sorry. I did write ROOM with an open mind as to whether it would be published for adults or YA; I imagined readers from about 11 up. The publishers thought it should be aimed at adults, but I notice it's been recommended as a YA-interest novel by, for instance, the American Library Association, so it does seem to be reaching teenagers."That's ok. It's getting easier to get lost in all the discussions happening. There's a lot of compelling points being made!
Thanks for revisiting this question for me here! I definitely think teenagers would enjoy this read, so it's good to know that it's reaching their hands.
Emma wrote: "Re: Ma, this is a very interesting discussion and raises meaty issues both artistically and ethically. I suppose I felt that one thing worth trying, in a novel about a woman who has been raped for seven years, was to keep the focus off rape - to follow Ma's own insistence that 'raped' is not her main identity. That's not a statement I'm making about all women who've been raped; it's just one story. I can see that for some of you, that decision stunts the book. But I do think, given the way most reviews and blogs devote a great deal of attention to Ma's experience and feelings, that she is being heard."
Thanks for clarifying this point for me. Like I said, part of my confusion and dissatisfaction with the novel was that it wasn't wholly a story about rape and captivity. It didn't work for me. However, you do make a good point when you state that it's just a different way of presenting a story. And based off the positive reviews and criticisms, it worked for others and is getting people talking, which is always valuable.
My introduction to ROOM was from CBC interview. Ms. Donoghue, you said (I'm paraphrasing) that you wanted to write a book that was inspired by the Fritzl case (and I assumed also by the Duggar case) that didn't focus so much on the horrors of the experience, but on the life the child could live in such a place. I was terrified to pick up the book initially, and I'm so glad I did. I certainly didn't feel that Ma lost any of her voice in the book, and I loved, loved, loved that you maintained in Jack the voice of a young boy. I could hear my own daughter of 3 speaking as Jack did. I would have felt a little bit betrayed if you had wandered from that narrow perspective in this book. It was about finding something "normal" in a very abnormal world. Of Ma trying her best to let her child be a child. There are so many tales of rape that find their character victims turn melancholy, empty, devoid of emotion. To me, this was a tale of a kind of "life after rape". While my own rape tale was not as traumatic as Ma's or Jane's, it was something that did capture me for a period of time almost wholly. Almost. But, even when dealing with the fallout of my experience, I found reasons to smile, laugh, have fun even. I love that the way you told the tale was to say that Ma was raped, but she was more than a victim - she was a whole person and a mother.I loved this book.
Tammie, We agree about Ma being a fully developed character. I am a bit embarrassed to have my experience compared to Ma's. One very long horrific night (and the book The Collector did haunt me throughout that night) is nothing at all like a seven year imprisonment. I was much more focused on the relationship between Jack and Ma as I was reading Room. It's only in response to this on line conversation that my focus shifted to rape and its aftermath.
Jane wrote: "Tammie, We agree about Ma being a fully developed character. I am a bit embarrassed to have my experience compared to Ma's. One very long horrific night (and the book The Collector did haunt me t..."I was also really interested in the mother/son relationship and how it changed throughout the book; in particular, I was interested in how Ma protected her child. I didn't mean to embarrass you, I'm sorry for that. I think that we sometimes need to be reminded that it's okay to enjoy life after sexual assault; most books and media make it feel as though the appropriate response is to "shut off". Maybe this is the wrong way to say it, but I feel like it's another way to victimize the victim. It's important to grieve, but, as told by almost all of the survivors I've encountered, it's also important to live.
Tammie wrote: "Jane wrote: "Tammie, We agree about Ma being a fully developed character. I am a bit embarrassed to have my experience compared to Ma's. One very long horrific night (and the book The Collector d..."Amen, Tammie. It was just the comparison that embarrassed me. A night may feel like seven years. But it isn't. Of course it affected me. And I am so glad it didn't define me. These conversations really complicated by thinking about Room. I feel glad to have been part of them.
