Wolf Hall question

For what it's worth, I found Mantel's unusual 3rd-person singular "he," used in a particular mood and style as a stylized reference to Cromwell, brilliantly apt in putting the man and his thoughts at the center of the story without having to repeat his name or some other alternative over and over, many times on each page. Moreover, a unusually large number of Mantel's central characters have the Christian name "Thomas"--Wolsey, More, Norfolk, Seymour, Wriothesley ("Call-Me-Risely"), etc.--and Mantel's conceit was eminently reasonable once "Thomas" was eliminated as an option. Her adoption in "Bring Up the Bodies" of the "he, Cromwell" usage in place of a stand-alone "he" disappointed me: I found it an awkward compromise, one perhaps made at the insistence, or plea, of an editor. In my view, once she decided to make a usage change, Mantel would have done better to simply revert to the dry, impersonal, academic "Cromwell" the original "he" sought to avoid.

I think it's a brilliant way of always looping your attention back to Cromwell, and seeing events from his point of view without making it a first-person narrative - it's a stylistic tic, but once you get used to it, very effective and subtle.

The second book is much clearer. There Mantel says often "he, Thomas Cromwell". I found with Wolf Hall you should assume "he" always refers to Cromwell and you are rarely, if ever, wrong.

Once I figured out he always, unless obviously by context, referred to Cromwell, I had no problem with it and found it to be a wonderful narrative device...better actually then the latest fad to have a Rashamon like multi-narrator I enjoyed the focus.

I put this book aside a few times in part because I found the use of "he" confusing, but was drawn back to it as I thought the writing was otherwise excellent. I agree with Contessa67 that once you get used to it, it's very effective. And Mantel does a great job of setting place and mood. I'm looking forward to reading "Bring Up the Bodies."

I appreciate the intended effect, but I do think it comes at the cost of occasional confusion. Other answers say that Mantel only uses he to mean Cromwell, but this is not correct. Scan a few random pages and you will see this.

The difference is that with other characters she follows the normal convention that the pronoun refers to the male character who was last referred to. She does not follow this convention with Cromwell. So, she might describe something about (say) Henry, using his name and then switching to 'he', still meaning Henry. But then in the very next sentence (or even the same one) 'he' switches to meaning Cromwell without anything to indicate the switch. It is usually immediately obvious from context, but sometimes takes a sentence or two to become clear.

I'm 'reading' in audiobook form, so I did start wondering if the written form made it clearer, for instance by using He (as is usually done with God) or special font. I even checked my wife's paperback and it isn't.

I am enjoying Wolf Hall, but I dislike the "he, Cromwells". If she's going to write out the word Cromwell, there's no reason to use the pronoun. I guess it's a style choice. Also, I'm listening to this book on audio, which does not help with point of view weirdness. It seems like she is switching to second-person sometimes, and first person seems to be in there a lot too, but it is, I suppose, framed in lengthy thought passages.

Debbie wrote: "This book must be being read by so many people! Has anyone else found the word 'he' confusing? When two men are being discussed, the word 'he' does not clearly indicate which person is being talk..."

I'm glad people have commented on this, I thought it was just me! I found Hilary Mantel's use of pronouns confusing all the way through the book, although having read some of the comments here, that 'he' is always referring to Cromwell, I will go back and have a look again. I did really enjoy the book, but that aspect spoiled it a bit for me.

The "he" was confusing at first, but I wound up loving it, and was disappointed that Mantel didn't make more use of it in Bring Up the Bodies. It made me slow down and think about the action. It also gave me a sense of Cromwell as someone who sees himself from the outside--that he observes his life as much as experiences it.

I never found the use of 'he' confusing. Wonderful book - even better sequel. Sublime writing, although I will probably need therapy before reading the last in the trilogy!

I was a bit confused in the beginning with Mantel's device of "he", but after a while, I got used to it. It completely emphasized, to me, that this was Cromwell's story.

Glad it wasn't just me! Wolf Hall. At first I thought my problem with keeping track on who "he" referred to was a symptom of losing my marbles!
However when I got used to it, I thoroughly enjoyed "Wolf Hall" and will shortly start "Bring Up the Bodies" - apparently Hilary M has taken on the comments, or taken the pleas of her editors, about this confusion in the sequel. Thanks, folks!

The "He" really didn't bother me. Yes, there were times when I became confused as to who was speaking. But it *was* so effective at putting you in the scene, that ultimately I enjoyed it.

Once I got used to it, I thought the use of "He, Cromwell" very effective in drawing the reader into Cromwell's mind and vision. It's a very distinctive and, I think, effective device.

If it is part of the narration it is always Cromwell. If it is part of a conversation then it is the subject: the person they are gossiping about. I don't remember finding any exceptions to that or wondering who 'he' was, but I try not to break off from reading mid-conversation as it spoils the flow, so would not have experienced the problem.
In "Bringing up the Bodies" 'He, Cromwell' is used a lot more often than it is in "Wolf Hall", which may please anyone who was having a problem with 'he'.

I believe the use of 'he' rather than 'Cromwell this or that' was intended to pull the reader closer to Cromwell as the protagonist. Using his name--Cromwell-- all the time puts you at a distance from him; it makes him just another of the many, many named characters rather than the person who is the true subject of the book.

Many people have said that the "he" refers to Cromwell. It does more than 50% of the time, but not much more than that. I found this arrogant way of writing distracting and contributed nothing to the story. I will not read any of her other books.

Overall liked this book, but found this device distracting. I really didn't see what it added thematically or narratively.

Hi Debbie,
Go and have a read of the discussion "Is it just me...". There may be some clarifications on there. Apparently, "he" always refers to Cromwell! I couldn't get on with this book, I tried to read it 3 times and eventually gave up. Glad you are enjoying it though.

Debbie wrote: "This book must be being read by so many people! Has anyone else found the word 'he' confusing? When two men are being discussed, the word 'he' does not clearly indicate which person is being talk..."

.....you are absolutely on the mark! Confusing, maddening.....so silly for a writer to blow it like that.

Many people criticize Wolf Hall for not being "clear". Maybe it isn't clear at first, but I believe that the veils Mantel puts up ultimately make the character crystallize. Also...excuse me while I rant. But I don't think it's the writer's responsibility to be clear! It's a literary device and either you like it or don't like it, or it works or it doesn't work. (I personally loved it and thought it worked brilliantly - it forced me closer to the Cromwell character.) I mean, Finnegans Wake is not clear. Faulkner is not always clear. It's not the writer's responsibility to make art that's clear, it's the reader's choice to read it or not. Some people will like it, others won't. That's what makes the world go round...