Brain Pain discussion
This topic is about
The Waves
The Waves - Spine 2012
>
Discussion - Week Four - The Waves - Section 8 & 9
date
newest »
newest »
I kept wondering whether Bernard might be the author of the whole thing--either inventing all the friends or imagining the thoughts of his friends and writing them down. Just my wild thought.
Laurele wrote: "I kept wondering whether Bernard might be the author of the whole thing--either inventing all the friends or imagining the thoughts of his friends and writing them down. Just my wild thought."Did you mean Bernard is Woolf ?
Rosario wrote: "Laurele wrote: "I kept wondering whether Bernard might be the author of the whole thing--either inventing all the friends or imagining the thoughts of his friends and writing them down. Just my wil..."No, that Bernard is the narrator.
I struggled with the end of this book, especially Section 8 where the soliloquies were so disconnected and abstract. I suppose the disconnection relates to the general air of disconnection among the six, with Rhoda even referring to “the penance of Hampton Court”. Bernard’s cry of “Fight… fight!” seems to be the catalyst that breaks the air of melancholy and brings them together at least to some extent. For me, this resonated with Bernard’s battle cry against death at the end.It seems right that Bernard has the sole and final soliloquy. He’s the one who tells the stories, which are never finished (or are finished in the way a wave is finished when it breaks on the shore?) I had the impression that Bernard was not actually talking to the fellow at the end, but that he saw him across a restaurant and started thinking of him as his audience as he told their final story. Anyone else?
Also, what did people make of Rhoda’s (incredibly depressing) soliloquy that immediately precedes section 8?
Mod
There is some of both ideas. Bernard as narrator, in the sense that he spent his life taking notes, and then recounting them in section 9. And of course, Woolf writes what Bernard says, as well as the others, so you could say Bernard is Woolf.
Speculation on my part, but Bernard's ending soliloquy sounded like Woolf more than the Bernard we come to know through the earlier soliloquies. Perhaps some of Bernard's ideas mirror Woolf's? We would have to do a lot of research to support that theory.
Big questions: If Bernard spends his life observing and taking notes, is he living? Or recording? And is that how writer's sometimes view themselves?
Whitney wrote: "I had the impression that Bernard was not actually talking to the fellow at the end, but that he saw him across a restaurant and started thinking of him as his audience as he told their final story"If Bernard is the author: the teller of tales and the final interpreter of all six identities, I took the person in the restaurant, who heard the tales but did not participate in them, to be the reader...all of us!
Jim wrote: "Big questions: If Bernard spends his life observing and taking notes, is he living? Or recording? And is that how writer's sometimes view themselves? "
On the continuum of lives lived largely externally (acting and interacting) to lives lived largely internally (observing and thinking), I would say that yes, Bernard is living. But I would say that inhabiting any space along that continuum counts as living. Different strokes...
Oh! Thinking about whether authors are wholly separate from the identities of those in their stories could be another way to approach our earlier question of whether these are six characters, each containing multitudes, or one character with many facets. (I vote for both!)
Rachel wrote: "Oh! Thinking about whether authors are wholly separate from the identities of those in their stories could be another way to approach our earlier question of whether these are six characters, each ..."And if Louis, Neville, Susan, Jinny and Rhoda are Bernard's different facets ? For example Susan, who is married and has children like him, Rhoda, who is in her own ideal world and maybe Louis (I could see some simmilar things between them in section 9, where he thinks about his condition of being mortal not as like as Louis with his poem but It's a thing). And of course, everyone loves Percival.
I have a question: Bernard in section 9 told Rhoda'd commited suicide. Is there a coincidence of why Bernard stopped taking notes ? Because his imaginary world had died with Rhoda ?
Mod
Bernard would support that idea:
...what I call "my life", it is not one life that I look back upon; I am not one person; I am many people; I do not altogether know who I am - Jinny, Susan,
Neville, Rhoda, or Louis: or how to distinguish my life from theirs. - p. 212
So is Bernard saying he is an amalgam of his friends? And if he had five different friends, would he be a blend of them? Early on, Bernard says he does not believe in separations between people. Is this a Buddhist idea of 'we are all one'? Does Bernard have boundary issues?
Nancy posted this link in the Week Two discussion. I think it might be useful here:
http://www.ted.com/talks/julian_baggi...
Jim wrote: "So is Bernard saying he is an amalgam of his friends? And if he had five different friends, would he be a blend of them?" Yes, It could be true, because it's in some ways. This would be useful here too, it's about mirror neurons: http://www.mindpowernews.com/MirrorNe...
And maybe the idea of "we're all one" is connected to the last ones. Perhaps that's why Rhoda and Louis had mentioned the circles in section 4.
Here's why I think Bernard is both an amalgam AND an individual (as are all the millions and millions of lives in the sea):As he recaps his & their lives chronologically in section 9, he meditates on this question several times. As a child, he seems to discover what makes him distinct: "I felt my indifference melt. Neville did not melt. 'Therefore,' I said, 'I am myself, not Neville,' a wonderful discovery" (240). "But we were all different. The wax -- the virginal wax that coats the spine melted in different patches for each of us" (241).
As a very young man, Bernard tries on the identities of various writers and poets, but then, after "the drop fell...I rose and walked away--I, I, I; not Byron, Shelley, Dostoevsky, but I, Bernard" (253).
The quote you pulled out, Jim, seems to be his state of mind in middle age, right before the Hampton Court reunion "...what I call "my life", it is not one life that I look back upon; I am not one person; I am many people; I do not altogether know who I am - Jinny, Susan, Neville, Rhoda, or Louis: or how to distinguish my life from theirs" (276).
Then during the reunion, which seems to be a cathartic point, "We saw for a moment, laid out among us, the body of the complete human being whom we have failed to be, but at the same time, cannot forget" (277).
But he seems to conclude, "We six, out of how many million millions, for one moment out of what measureless abundance of past time and time to come, burnt there triumphant. The moment was all; the moment was enough. And then Neville, Jinny, Susan and I as a wave breaks, burst asunder, surrendered...leaving Rhoda and Lewis [the solitaries!] to stand on the terrace by the urn" (278).
"Was this then, this streaming away mixed with Susan, Jinny Neville, Rhoda, Louis as sort of death? A new assembly of elements? Some hint of what was to come?" (279)"
So I feel that Woolf is saying that Bernard is neither wholly a solitary island nor a tidy combo of the six friends. The many identities we carry within ourselves and our connections with others (now and with people from deep in the past) change fluidly over time. Different circles form and break. There may be fleeting, ecstatic moments of connection, but we never achieve lasting union. But this ambiguity (death? new beginning?) is just part of the constantly joining, shifting and breaking sea of life. Those fleeting moments are enough.
Or I may be a little Waves drunk here. What do you think?
Rachel wrote: "Or I may be a little Waves drunk here. What do you think? ..."Nice, I think that's pretty spot on (and if we were being graded, A+ for use of quotes that support the thesis).
Mod
Nice, I think that's pretty spot on (and if we were being graded, A+ for use of quotes that support the thesis)."
Yes, all good points, well supported, but we're using gold stars instead of letter grades this semester - LOL!
There are also many sad moments when Bernard wants to connect and truly "know" the others, but he realizes that he can't know what they do privately. And sometimes he can't maintain connections because he's too lazy to cross the street. (I forget which pages, but he mentions this twice)
The breaking of the waves on the shore, the cycle from unified body, to breaker, to foam on the beach, and the withdraw back to the unified body is truly a wonderful way to look at birth, life, death. Now that we're at the end of the book, the interludes are easier to connect to the soliloquies.
Whitney wrote: "Rachel wrote: "Or I may be a little Waves drunk here. What do you think? ..."Nice, I think that's pretty spot on (and if we were being graded, A+ for use of quotes that support the thesis)."
Hey, thanks! Re-reading a bit, I was amazed, again, at how much Woolf crams into each moment. Hard to know if I am on a reasonable track.
Rachel wrote: "Here's why I think Bernard is both an amalgam AND an individual (as are all the millions and millions of lives in the sea):As he recaps his & their lives chronologically in section 9, he meditate..."
True and nice points Rachel ! Bermard would be proud if he could read your lines !
Interesting idea, Rosario, bringing mirror neurons into the discussion about Bernard (or anyone)as an amalgam of his friends. Mirror neurons do play a huge role in our social interactions, connecting us to one another through an ability to share experience, in a way. The brain's empathetic capabilities allow us to form complex social connections and relate to each other, forming deep emotional bonds, which help the species survive. The firing of mirror neurons allow us to empathize with another's experiences, but they don't necessarily indicate that we are the same, only that all humans have certain things in commmon. I didn't read Bernard as indicating that he was a combination of Loius, Neville, Jinny, Susan, and Rhoda specifically, but rather that he was emphasizing the similarities we share with others in general. He seemed to me to be proposing that people are not as solitary, unique, or individual as often believed. There are aspects of ourselves we can find in practically anyone, so although we are "I," every "I" is an assimilation of characteristics shared by others. That he used Louis, Rhoda, etc. as examples seemed to me fairly arbitrary. Rachel wrote: "Here's why I think Bernard is both an amalgam AND an individual (as are all the millions and millions of lives in the sea):
As he recaps his & their lives chronologically in section 9, he meditate..."
Great post! These were my thoughts when reading as well, although you articulated them better than I probably would have :)
Rachel wrote: "If Bernard is the author: the teller of tales and the final interpreter of all six identities, I took the person in the restaurant, who heard the tales but did not participate in them, to be the reader...all of us!"
Whitney wrote: " I had the impression that Bernard was not actually talking to the fellow at the end, but that he saw him across a restaurant and started thinking of him as his audience as he told their final story. Anyone else?..."
Both of these interpretations crossed my mind during the final soliloquy.
I liked the mirror neurons too! Nice when artistic and scientific insights converge.
Ashley wrote: "I didn't read Bernard as indicating that he was a combination of Loius, Neville, Jinny, Susan, and Rhoda specifically, but rather that he was emphasizing the similarities we share with others in general."Or perhaps Bernard means that we are the sum of our experiences of others. We are an amalgam of our interactions with other people. We wouldn't be who we are without the specific episodes that we have in our relationships with others. If Jinny had not kissed Louis, Bernard would not be Bernard.
Yet we are also limited in our understanding of others because we can never truly experience what they do in the same way that they do (crossing the street reference). We can only understand them in reference to ourselves.
Nancy wrote: "Or perhaps Bernard means that we are the sum of our experiences of others. We are an amalgam of our interactions with other people...Yet we are also limited in our understanding of others because we can never truly experience what they do in the same way that they do (crossing the street reference)"Good points. Experiences determine in large part who we are or who we become. They even influence our neural development (since we already brought in neurons :) ). We share experiences that shape us, but they do so in various ways according to our personalities, prior experiences, etc. Our perspectives are different due to our individual developmental experiences, giving a different texture to even shared experiences (demonstrated so well by the six voices in The Waves).
This discussion covers Section 8 & 9 of The Waves.
Section 8:
Interlude – The sun is sinking, evening is coming soon. Rain drops a bit here and there, competing with the waning sun. Autumn announces itself in colors cooled, drained and dulled.
Soliloquies – The friends gather at Hampton Court, but middle-age has given them sharp edges that cut and grate. A silence falls and they head out into the night. Holding hands, they connect again, but only for a moment. As they slip apart again, they breathe in the night and feel their mortality.
Section 9:
Interlude – The sun has sunk below the horizon. Sea and sky are once more one. Leaves fall, a bird cries a solitary call. Death has come.
Soliloquies – Bernard has dinner with a stranger. He tells the story of the six friends. He meditates on the meaning of life…
Interlude - The waves broke on the shore.
What’s going on at Hampton Court? Why the initial contention?
Have the friends changed? Or are there still glimpses of their younger selves?
Bernard has the final word for the group. Why might Woolf have chosen him for this summing up?
How does Bernard's final soliloquy differ from the rest of the book?
Feel free to talk about any and all aspects of the book now that we’ve reached the end.