Water for Elephants
discussion
Something I don't understand...
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Emily
(new)
-
rated it 5 stars
May 24, 2011 11:41AM
This may seem obvious, but i don't understand the significance of the title other than the fact that it was the lie that started the flashbacks....any personal interpretations are welcome:D
reply
|
flag
I thought it was a good title since that is how the whole flashback started, when the old man lied about that, it really set Jacob off and sent him down memory lane. And then in the end Rosie ended up being a significant part of his life. I thought it all tied together nicely.
Yes, I think you've both hit the nail on the head together, it had to do with the 'younger old man's' lie (he was 10 years younger than Jacob:p)and as he reminisced he became more alive in the sense he started challenging his restrictions more frequently and more forcefully, his remembering reasserted his personality which made him seek independence.I though the ending was a bit strange though, I thought surely there's some legal restriction that prevents an old man placed in a care home from 'running away with the circus. I mean when you think of all the red tape, it seemed almost too good to be true
That's the point though isn't it? It's the circus. They're not known for being law abiding if it's in their interest to bed the law. He was literally, running away with the circus- for the second time. I thought the ending was perfect.
I totally agree with you. How boring and depressing would the ending have been if Jacob had to be sent back to the nursing home where he was miserable? It was a great ending.
I worked in a nursing home. Even a great nursing home with good staff is not somewhere a person wants to have to live the rest of their life- he took his independence back...I can only imagine how many people would want that opportunity. I like that the parts of the book where he's in his current age in the home give a little peek into what it's like to be in those old worn out shoes.
It kind of bugged me that we didn't find out how Jacob knew the other guy was lying. I just wanted to know! I thought it would be something like elephants drink too much water and there's no way a single person could carry it for them. Oh well, I'm probably over thinking a minor detail :)
I thought that's exactly what he explained to the nurses aide...?
Oh he did? Its been a while since I read it so I must have forgotten that part!
Yes it was a wonderful ending, I was just thinking of whether it was possible, I mean running away with the circus is all very well, but wouldn't his leaving be considered from some points of view as kidnapping or oldmnannapping? I was thinking of what his family's reaction might be if their Dad just upped and disappeared; would they put out a missing persons search for him? Would the police be involved, and close State lines? Probably not, but for some reason that lack of 'reality' in a way sort of bugged me a little.I guess I'm not used to reading books like this, fictional personal memoirs based on history, but I had reached halfway and I was still waiting for the novel to truly start. I thought it was a lot of exposition, but then I realised the story was bedded in the exposition:p That threw me slightly at first.
I have had an elderly parent in a nursing home.He did not actually, physically leave the nursing home. He escaped in his mind. The nursing home became the circus for him. The nurses and aides became the circus people.
He went back to his happiest time of life, in his elderly mind. My mother did the same thing in her last years. The nursing home became her 'school'. The aides were the 'kids'. The director was the 'principal'. She 'worked' for him and bossed the 'kids' around.
I also think there is theme of purpose/importance with Jacob. After watching both my grandparents slip away in nursing homes (however wonderful of a place it was), they both felt they had lost that purpose. My grandma's favorite thing to do was to go home for the afternoon and wash the dishes for my grandpa.Jacob had no importance or purpose as an old man in a nursing home. It was a chore for his family to come spend time with him, he just sat, ate, slept. The circus represents a time when he was important - in the lives of the people and the animals. He was fulfilled, he was living. Every human being as a need to feel important.
Rachel wrote: "It kind of bugged me that we didn't find out how Jacob knew the other guy was lying. I just wanted to know! I thought it would be something like elephants drink too much water and there's no way a ..."I was waiting for that to come up again too. I thought the reasoning would be the same as you did.
At first I too thought that the ending was too far fetched but then I realized that it was just the perfect ending for the entire story. I do not plan on seeing the movie though because - after reading the book - I truly feel that the leads are not right for the parts they've been cast in.
Beth wrote: "Rachel wrote: "It kind of bugged me that we didn't find out how Jacob knew the other guy was lying. I just wanted to know! I thought it would be something like elephants drink too much water and th..."Jacob knew that elephants drink way way too much water for anyone to carry it to them. You have to bring the elephant to the water, That's how he knew the guy was lying.
Young wrote: "At first I too thought that the ending was too far fetched but then I realized that it was just the perfect ending for the entire story. I do not plan on seeing the movie though because - after re..."The leads in this movie were actually cast perfectly! Reese was a wonderful Marlena, I can't picture anyone that could have played her better. I know there are many people out there that are not fans of Robert Pattinson, but he actually did a really good job. I thought the movie followed the book really well, it was such a good movie, you should really give it a shot.
Water in general is extremely symbolic throughout the whole book from the stolen wash buckets to the lemonade. The idea that water, something that civilized countries typically take for granted, could be a prized and valuable commodity provides a foundation for our understanding of need and poverty. The point is that you can never carry water for an elephant. The need is too great and the resources too small. In the end, you can only survive and allow the elephant to find water for itself.
Zorro wrote: "I have had an elderly parent in a nursing home.He did not actually, physically leave the nursing home. He escaped in his mind. The nursing home became the circus for him. The nurses and aides ..."
I just had an "AH!" moment when I read your post. I had not even thought of that! What a great point! I do feel it can be taken in both contexts, that he escaped in his mind and/or in real life. I want to read the ending again while keeping your post in mind. Thank you!
Thank you, Ashley! You and my daughter are the only ones who seem to understand this ending as I see it. Wouldn't it be hard for a writer if she meant it this way and NO ONE GOT IT!
It would be so frustrating! My immediate thought when I finished the book was: "would someone really take the chance of "keeping" an elderly patient for a couple months like that on the road? My second thought was: well they aren't the best with rules to begin with so maybe they wouldn't care, but when I read your post it really came together! Everything fit together like a puzzle.
I thought all those same things. I thought the ending was weak until 'everything fit together like a puzzle' for me too. I wish the author would tell us what she intended...
I agree. I like to come up with my own conclusions, but I still like to know how they felt as well.
To me any other interpretation is non-sense...not sensible, not realistic, not in keeping with the rest of the story - too naive.
My personal interpretation was that the title led us to the question, can we really trust our memory? Or, do we create a memory that is comfortable for us? Jacob was angry at the man that stated that he carried water for elephants. This was factually a lie an impossibility in his mind, and in reality. It took Rosemary to explain that sometimes we tell ourselves something so many times that it becomes our truth, our reality, and our most real memory. The man at the table in no way tried to lie or deceive with his memory, but it didn't negate the fact that his memory was a lie.
Now, look at the two depictions of the stampede. The first in which he frantically searches for "her", the smile she seems to be giving as she reaches for the stake.
In the second, Rosie is in the picture. She is painted as Marlena's protector, as she stands over Marlena while the stampede rolls through. Rosie also becomes August's killer, with the stony look in her eyes.
Jacob justifies "Rosie's" behavior because of the beatings she endured from August, and because he was on his was to kill August that previous night (how could he hold that against her, when he wanted to do it). After all she became Marlena's protector. Right? But he tells himself he couldn't have told Marlena, as she may have looked at Rosie differently.
There is nothing in Marlena's characterization to suggest that she would not have forgiven Rosie had she in fact been her protector. This was Jacob's defense against the moral implications he would have to address, if he admitted that Marlena had killed August.
Even as he justified Rosie's act of killing by stating that he was going to do it himself and the she was badly beaten by August on many occasions, therefore how else was she to react. There don't appear to be any moral implications with an animal, but a person...here is where the want to kill and the act of killing, despite provocation, become troubling.
Jacob painted and re-painted the memory of this beloved, caring mother of their children, horse lover, companion, and exceptional circus entertainer. Killer, simply didn't fit in his masterpiece.
An elephant never forgets, but sometimes we do vividly recall bringing water to elephants.
Kirstin wrote: "Young wrote: "At first I too thought that the ending was too far fetched but then I realized that it was just the perfect ending for the entire story. I do not plan on seeing the movie though beca..."I, too, thought the movie followed the book very well. I would recommend the movie.
This is a good question! This is one of those titles I think that has that deep meaning, I think, if you know what I mean. For me it was significant the title because Rosie (the elephant) is what in the end really brought Jacob and Marlena together, because he had to train Rosie for Marlena to use in the performance. And I think the water was what originally introduced Jacob and Rosie, because if I remember right, didn't he start by getting her water? I could be completely wrong. But this is how I kind of saw it.http://romancebookie.blogspot.com/
I need to reread this. Lol I'm not remembering much of this.
Well didn't August and the circus owner tease Jacob when he is first brought on the train asking him to water elephants. Jacob tells them it would take gallons of water to get an elephant satisfied. That answer turns their attention to Jacob's animal knowlege, thus giving him a job as the vet.
I could be completely wrong, but didn't Jacob's vet skills come into affect when Marlena's horse got sick? The elephant didn't come along until afterwards, because they needed a new act after Marlena's star horse died.
In the beginning, an old man claims to have carried water for elephants which triggers Jacob's memories. In my opinion, since elephants have a powerful memory, it connects back to Jacob's very old, very intricate memories of having to work at a circus, and thus the title Water for Elephants.
I think it also sums up the whole story. He argues that carrying water for elephants is an extremely difficult task since they drink so much. It kind of resembles Jacob's hardships - how he was the "Water Carrier" throughout his whole life.
I think it also sums up the whole story. He argues that carrying water for elephants is an extremely difficult task since they drink so much. It kind of resembles Jacob's hardships - how he was the "Water Carrier" throughout his whole life.
Emily wrote: "This may seem obvious, but i don't understand the significance of the title other than the fact that it was the lie that started the flashbacks....any personal interpretations are welcome:D"The title is a symbol for the withering mind of an old person. This is why we are left wondering if the end is real, or did Jacob really imagine his own ending?
I would have read the book even if the title had been "Water for Circus Freaks" but, I've tried to think other than the lie I don't recall any other significance to the title. I don't think it was suppose to be as definitive as say the book title "To Kill a Mockingbird".
Or he just fell asleep and gave the rest of us some peace, overly dramatic cheesy book blurrrgh, waste of a read.
i think even though Jacob's days at circus were weary and tiresome and he was in utter desolation....the monotony of his later life puts a gloss and sheen to his earlier and more "adventurous" days..at the end of his life probably the desire was amplified even more..a menial task back then might seem like a distant dream that was once realized..his taking "water for elephants" were the heights of his glorified and youthful days.
Colleagues,
I worked for Ringling for eight months and can attest that you do not bring water to elephants. You bring them to the water unless you have access to a fire hydrant and a long hose. I can also attest to the fact that an elephant or pretty much any large circus animal including the two legged kind are capable of murder.
Bob Cherny
I worked for Ringling for eight months and can attest that you do not bring water to elephants. You bring them to the water unless you have access to a fire hydrant and a long hose. I can also attest to the fact that an elephant or pretty much any large circus animal including the two legged kind are capable of murder.
Bob Cherny
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
