21st Century Literature discussion
This topic is about
Parrot and Olivier in America
2012 Book Discussions
>
Parrot and Olivier in America - Section 1 - Olivier I to VII (August 2012)
I absolutely agree with your comments although the making of a pampered, self-centered mother's boy was interesting. Narrations from a child's viewpoint have never left me wanting more.
Great points there, Will. I completely agree that things started off slow though there are some genius bits of writing throughout.Unfortunately for me my subconscious somehow made a connection between this and Caleb Williams, which is a novel I absolutely hated but had to read for a Romanticism class I took, and this blurred my opinion of the first few hundred pages.
So much so that I put the book down for a few days and am restarting it tonight with hopes that by talking about the Caleb connection I've exorcised the feeling from my psyche.
@Jason - I've never read (nor intend to begin) Caleb Williams, what parallels made you connect the two? What common feeling turned you off?
In most of the books I've read dealing with this time period, we are shown life as it treats young girls not young boys so I found Olivieri's parents reactions to his bids for affection to be both heart breaking and eye opening.
For reference:
Caleb Williams
by William Godwin."William Godwin wrote this book in 1794. The author is best known (now) for having been married to the feminist Mary Wollstencraft, and engendering a daughter who would elope with Shelley and then write Frankenstein. But in his time, Godwin was a famed and impassioned reformer, above all seething with anger at the law as it operated in England, a law that pretended to offer justice but which was in the pockets of the rich to manipulate as they pleased. Having written a polemic on the subject, he produced Caleb Williams - by way of illustration." From review by Zina Rohan
Since I knew nothing about this novel, I scanned some of the reviews here on Goodreads. "First Gothic novel" claims one?
"...It doesn't suggest an alternative to the existing government, it's not pro-capitalism or pro-syndicalism but it does hold to the most basic principles of moral anarchy which are non-violence and non-coercion...." From review by Marcus, bold added (Don't know that I have previously encountered "non-violence" and "non-coercion" named as "the most basic principles of moral anarchy".)
Will wrote: "@Jason - I've never read (nor intend to begin) Caleb Williams, what parallels made you connect the two? What common feeling turned you off?"Hi Will, I haven't been able to place my finger on just why my mind was making that connection, as yet. Certainly Mr. Carey can write circles around Godwin so it isn't that. The most I can figure is that there is a certain similar tone to Olivier's voice and Caleb's voice. The pacing early on in both narratives, due to similarity in the voices perhaps, is also about the same.
I would also like to add that while the feeling is still there, after re-reading the first fifty pages again last night I feel like there may be less of a similarity between the two works than I first assumed.
Mod
I'm having trouble getting through the first section. Please tell me it picks up soon, or the kid at least grows up some.
Casceil, not to worry, he grows older soon and the Parrot part shows the other side of society.
I think I'm going to have to check somewhere besides my Kindle copy to figure out the structure of this book -- I am still a bit awkward about moving from where I am in text to TOC, et al. What I am really saying is that I am not sure where I am relative to the section we are discussing. So, I may be foreshadowing, but I hope I am not introducing a spoiler to say what a shock it must have been for a child growing up in the days of the French revolution to reach an age where he began to realize what the reality of that time was like for his immediate family. At times, this book doesn't feel as if it was originally written in English. I am finding some of the similes and metaphors awkward -- I'll provide some examples that struck me in a future post -- my Kindle isn't within reach at the moment.
Well, I'm checking against an electronic edition on my kindle, and there are chapter sections, and a seperate page between named sections, the first being Olivier, the next being Parrot. The Olivier section has clearly defined and openly numbered sections in roman numerals, I-VII.My local library (which some will recall discussion over recently, due to it's Lilliputian size) happens to have a copy in this morning (ha, take that, doubters!) So I'll pop over shortly and find out what that edition says. It's nice to live 1 block from a library!
That's an interesting observation you made Lily about the book feeling at times that it wasn't written in English.If I'm not mistaken Mr. Carey is Australian so I wonder if he intentionally gave Olivier's chapters a translated feel to them to add to the authenticity of the character's voice?
@Jason - I suspect it's more to reflect his study of Alexis de Tocqueville's work, which he said was a method of approaching America and American themes, which he's largely avoided up to now despite living here for many many years now.General Update: The hardcover copy is exactly the same in all respects as the version on my kindle, so all I can do is include some page numbers for the sections. Mr. Carey unhelpfully doesn't provide helpful bitesize portions for us to work with. Some sections are longer, some sections are VERY short, so I'll have to vary the ranges we discuss to keep them of a reasonable size for the reader.
I sympathize for your dilema, Will, as I found while reading it that I would just get comfortable with one voice when he switched to the other. This at times made it difficult for me to keep track of what was going on and timelines.
Will wrote: "The first section of the book was interesting, but a little slow for me. Yes, I'm familiar with the style of writing of the time, I've probably read far more of that period than most. It's frequent..."Thank goodness it's not just me!
You can all point and laugh and throw small rocks at me for this but, I don't like classic literature. Maybe it's because I didn't study it. I like the ancient Greek plays. Particularly Aeschylus, but they're very modern in a way. Or rather they have more in common with things written in my lifetime than things written 100 years before it. More focus on who is doing what. Less focus on the furniture they're sitting on, the clothing they're wearing or the view from the window as they do it.But I don't care for the long circuitous route to the point.
And I'm feeling a bit resentful toward Mr. Carey, I'm afraid.
Though I confess there are moments when I am charmed. I wish there were more of them.
No, while I've read more than my share of all age's literature, the signal-to-noise ratio of 200-150 years ago is annoying. Much like Naval policy of the day, never were more beautiful words beaten over the head and caught by a press gang of over-educated fops and compelled to menial service. So no worries, Deborah.
Don't despair, the book is actually quite interesting once this first section is over.
This reminds me of good old Dickens, somehow, and I like the style. I also like how effortlessly Carey brings 19th century to life. The history doesn't feel like a thin layer, something used as a spice (as it quite often turns out with other books with historical milieu). Somehow the historical aspect seems to come naturally, it feels like a real chunk of the story. You know how sometimes the author describes the historical setting in a way that makes you feel more like it's an item in a museum glass case rather than a real place and real time with real people?
Dickens. Sad face.
You don't like Dickens? Or do you find the comparison blasphemous? I admit I've only read Great Expectations but I liked it very much. :) (<-happy face!)
I don't like Dickens. I know, this means I am a bad person. I'm sorry, if that counts.
You're not a bad person, Deborah, perhaps only a little naughty. Now if you were to say you didn't like Wilkie Collins I might have to reassess your character but we still love you. In the meantime, this book really does have the flavour of the 19th century and gives us a glimpse of the lives of the French elite during this period of unrest and social change. It must have been a rude awakening to them to find their lives, influence, and social positions so turned upside down.
There's a lot of dickens to be disliked. It's exactly what I meant by press gang lit.
I am not a bad person.
No, Deborah, you are not..at least, if you are then I guess I am too since I'm not crazy about Dickens either. With the exception of a few authors, I find most books from that time period rather depressing. Much prefer modern day literature.
When I read Dickens, I seriously feel as though I can taste cobwebs in my mouth.
I just don't buy into the idea that you should never use one word when 147 will do.
If you don't like verbose, I guess it's impossible to like Dickens. :) I shouldn't really say anything becuase I have such limited experience, but what I remember liking about Great Expectations was the fairy tale-ness, the sense of good old-fashioned adventure and some of the characters. Miss Havisham was, I thought, wonderfully weird and fascinatingly tragic while Mr. Wemmick was, to my eye, an exceptionally rounded character seeing that he didn't have a prominent part in the novel.
Deborah wrote: "I just don't buy into the idea that you should never use one word when 147 will do."LOL! In the days when stories were still being serialized in the magazines that came into my family's home, I always had trouble staying with them. I don't think I have ever succeeded very well either when those same stories got packed together into a book. Those experiences were obviously decades after dear Dickens, but you may have hit upon why I have trouble staying with his novels and avoid them for other things in the wonderful collection of English literature available to us. (I do like some of his characters and even some of the story lines, including the insights provided into and from another time.)
Mod
Lily wrote: "At times, this book doesn't feel as if it was originally written in English. I am finding some of the similes and metaphors awkward -- I'll provide some examples that struck me in a future post..."Okay -- time to keep my promise/(threat?):
"like an Italian footman falling down a staircase" (p. 5) -- I presume "Italian" must be relevant to the simile, but I'm lost on that one completely. Although one can guess at the relevance of the simile itself, it seemed to this reader less relevant than some other comparison might have been.
"the gawing of the crows, the antic gargoyle torments of country life" (p. 7) -- yeah, I get it, even the feeling of medieval France, but really?, from "gargoyle" as an adjective to the confusion between "torments" and the "torrents" of rainwater more easily associated with the function of gargoyles along ancient architecture -- also, aren't gargoyles more urban than country, but now I am ranting....Still, consider all this in the context of "After how many choking nights was I still awake to witness the pale light of dawn lifting the dew-wet poplar leaves from the inky waters of the night, to hear the cawing of the crows, the antic gargoyle torments of country life?" Peter, go study Proust, even Flaubert, please.
"filled me with the atoms of America twenty years before I breathed its air" (p. 7)-- "molecules" might have worked; "breath" is about smell, "atoms" are -- well, I haven't thought it through, but they didn't work with "breathed" for me.
"naked as a broken statue" (p.7) -- what about being "broken" makes the statue any more or less naked?
"...more grained than in the pencil portrait..." (p. 8) -- what does "more grained" mean here? Doesn't make sense that wrinkle lines were left out of the pencil sketch; the implication is more the opposite.
"...whose voice in her sickbed was thin as paper" (p. 8) -- "tissue", maybe, but why comparison with a paper substance at all?
"...my heart was beating like the devil, my blood sluicing through my arteries and veins..."(p.24) -- I wanted it to be obvious why the comparison was with the "devil" and it wasn't, at least to me.
"...Turkey rugs..." (p.32) -- why "Turkey" instead of "Turkish" -- reflection of some usage of the time unfamiliar to me? I want there to be a reason, but no longer trust the author and his word choices.
"One broke the sealing wax with a dreamy sort of pleasure such as an eagle might feel lazily gliding on a warm delicious current." (p. 32) -- fascinating comparison, but what does it tell me about the personality of Oliver; why would he make such a comparison? (I'm seeking character development here, not clever observations of the author.)
"...blood-rich cavity of sound..." (p. 35) -- vivid imagery, but of what: the room where Oliver's mother is? the space within which her voice could be heard? (For some reason, my mind jumped to the bedroom where young Jane Eyre was sent in punishment.)
But there were passages that caught my ear and created new synapses of connections:
"...as light as the dream of a child that was never to be born..." (p. 8) -- haunting, but not entirely certain I fully comprehended the allusion.
"...the fuzzy moon and the watery clouds scudding above Normandy..." (p. 8) -- didn't really matter that it wasn't clear whether both the moon and the clouds were scudding, or only the clouds.
"...I read the rattle of the deadly blade in its grooved oaken track." (p. 35) -- not sure I understand the timing of this, that Oliver at this age understood the guillotine, but I think that is what we are given to understand. The horrors such must have left in the mind of a small boy.
"...making a deep soothing noise of a type one might imagine would persuade a cow into her bails..." (p. 35) -- humorous, yet suggested several aspects of the probable attributes of the servant Odile.
Casceil wrote: "When you are being paid by the word (and I think Dickens was), why use one word when you can get paid for 147?"You must remember too that this was the time that people actually practiced the art of conversation and hinted rather than expressed their views and feelings. They gently came sideways to the point rather than galloping head first. Most of the beauty of words has now been co-opted by the economy of words, or even worse, short forms and symbols.
Mikela wrote: "Most of the beauty of words has now been co-opted by the economy of words, or even worse, short forms and symbols...."Ouch! Do you really (entirely) believe what you have written here, Mikela?
I'm not referring here so much to the written word in literature as to the oral or daily usage of words in conversation and social media. There are outstanding books being published every day, many of which this group tries to read, discuss and appreciate. If I didn't believe that I wouldn't be part of this group. Books do however reflect society and in some cases help to shape it.
Mikela wrote: "Books do however reflect society and in some cases help to shape it..."Thx for your response, Mikela.
However, I'm not quite sure what qualification, of any, of your first three sentences you might be intending with your last one (quoted above).
Okay, first of all, what I said was not meant as a criticism. The 19th century had a formality of speech and behaviour that we find foreign today. The language used by the upper classes was more flowery and descriptive, long-winded is a term that could be used. Witness the language of Olivieri is this first section. In modern day literature (unless written purposely as though it was written much earlier), the language is more informal to mirror that of a more informal society. As to my comment about shaping society, there are examples where a book highlights an injustice (Uncle Tom's Cabin for one), and works to change how people think about certain things and leads to societal change. The styles of both centuries have authors whose use of language is so beautiful it can move you to tears, yet each speaks the language of the time they were written. These are just my rambling thoughts and may be totally off base and wrong.
Enjoyed the conversation! Thanks, Mikela.I haven't added much to it, I'm afraid, but perhaps you can tell by my selection and comments on bits of Parrot and Olivier that I, too, love words and language. I can't do much of a job of stringing them together myself (except perhaps on selected technical topics), but I am continuing to gain in my enjoyment of literature, between reading and contact with people like yourself -- even as I muddle through "retirement" years. (My own fields of study were technical and business, which I worked within for 30+ years.)
I keep wanting to weigh in, but I'm having some trouble articulating my points.First, I think at every age we look around and take stock and say "ugh." The fashion of communication changes, but ideas are still exchanged and most of the worst crap is mislaid and lost to the scrutiny of history. Thank goodness. Perspective. It's easier to see from further away, though the details blur.
My guess is that the beauty of art is always in what is hinted at. Sometimes the hints are hidden in the details and at other times they are in the negative space, or the pauses between details. Detail of course being the brilliance of older writing. The pauses, the things not said, but still evident, are the brilliance of the modern. (This is an opinion not an objective provable conclusion, I admit. It's true because I say so.)
Growing up I had a friend who would refuse to read any author who wasn't dead. Because, he pointed out, there were too many classics to read, why waste time on the inferior product of the time.
My feelings run completely opposite of his. I feel like there are too many great things written in my lifetime that I don't want to waste time reading people who are dead and not relevant to me.
He and I are both wrong, no doubt. But I like that with modern literature I have the context needed to get the nuance.
I am starting this book a little later than expected after my family road trip effectively preempted any reading plans I may have had. Now that I have finally cracked the e-spine, I share the sentiments above that lament the fastidious attention to period writing. I also share the slightly off-topic opinion of Dickens, although I must add the caveat that the stories behind the verbal effluvium are stupendous.I also admit that there are some terribly witty turns of phrase that appealed to me immensely. A prime example is the beginning of Chapter IV: "My monther's carriage was like its patron--heroically resistant to change."
Judging from this first topic, it looks like discussion on this book will be lively. I think I may be more excited to see what this group has to say than I am about finishing the book in the first place!
I'm a third of the way through. More or less. I found this hard going at first. I think Carey is clever, but not always, I don't know, engaging maybe. I'm still not invested in Olivier. I guess this goes back to our discussion about liking books but not the characters. Here, not only don't I like Olivier, I don't actively dislike him.
But I've turned a corner with Parrot.
What is it with Parrot and his being fated to end up sharing beds with people who suffer nightmares?
Are we ready for a thread on Section II? Where am I overlooking our schedule for the month? One of the problems with ebooks is maintaining that same physical sense of how much of a book one has read, despite the percentages one is provided. I look forward to versions with actual printed-volume page numbers being regularly displayed, preferably as #/total!
I've been AWOL for a couple days with family stuff. The next two threads will show up soon, the next tomorrow, with kindle % and page numbers.
Will wrote: "I've been AWOL for a couple days with family stuff. The next two threads will show up soon, the next tomorrow, with kindle % and page numbers."I was complaining about Kindle formats, not formats here!
Anyway, I really must remember to look for the physical copy of this thing next time I am in my library -- if it is on the shelves. There is no table of contents on my ebook copy -- and there does not seem to be one in the physical book, either, based on the "first look" I can glean from Amazon. I still don't know the overall structure of the book, and this is one time that I am finding that particularly frustrating.
I'm doing the audio book. I did the math the first time I tried to figure out the percentage. Now I just eyeball it.
Tell me about it. The phyical book has no table either. I never cared much about chapters til I started leading discussions.
Will wrote: "Tell me about it. The phyical book has no table either. I never cared much about chapters til I started leading discussions."LOL! I've known the guys who write about how to read a book usually say to get a sense of the overall structure as a first step. Well, I've pretty much not thought about how I do that with a physical book, but now that I use an ebook frequently I find I'm having to rethink the whole process.
I did take a look at O&P in a bookstore this afternoon and I see that it seems to be mostly alternating chapters on each character, many with subdivisions of the chapter. The ones on Oliver seemed more often longer in a casual perusal.
I agree with some of Lily's comments earlier about some of the comparisons coming off a little bumpy. I remember thinking to my self several times, what does that have to do with this? And several of Lily's quotes were ones I was thinking back on. Lots of good comparisons, but several awkward ones, to me that is.
21st Century Literature
Books mentioned in this topic
Parrot and Olivier in America (other topics)Caleb Williams (other topics)
To be sure, there are splendid turns of phrase here, but not often enough to make the setup for the rest of the book jump off the page more than a setup does. I'm given to understand however, that Parrot might be where the interest of our author lies...
Thoughts? Chime in here with your violent passionate love for classical french ribaldry, and your hatred for Ulysses S. Grant.