Forgiving Anna and Emma (Tolstoi and Flaubert)

Anna Karenina and Madame Bovary each tell the respective (unhappy) story of women in marriage. The writing of such stories is indicative of the deeper development of female characters, and indeed, the acknowledgement that women are also capable of independent thought (as well as the obligatory service of their husband). The act of adultery means different things in different societies, so both these stories are often reinterpreted to fit in with popular trends - e.g. Madame Bovary is sometimes seen as a feminist triumph, the realisation of the female sexual desire that exists beyond the satisfaction of men.

Despite the loaded issues that form the focus of each story, it should probably be kept in mind that neither author is out to make a point. Anna Karenina, written during the realist era, seeks as much to give the reader an insight into late 19th century Russia, its society and decor, as it does to make its many observations concerning happiness and how we ought to live. Flaubert, known for abhoring high-society and its excess, makes no indigtment against Emma Bovary, as either a product of this society or as an adulterous wife. We are rather presented the lives of two women and those around them, complicated with many happinesses and unhappinesses along the way.

In reading Anna Karenina, I guess I began by making this mistake, and focusing on how Tolstoi was supposed to justify the actions of Anna. A woman, with a boring and unappreciative husband is seduced by a pretentious git. She doesn't deserve sympathy - she's an idiot. Of course, what becomes apparent is that happiness is so complicated. We are brought up expecting that things should fall into place, but nothing does and we are given insufficient resources to cope with the fall-out. The tragedy in Anna's case, is that she has an unrealistic faith in men to protect her from the society they drag her into.

Madame Bovary is a much more complex story, affected as it is by unmistakable mental illness. Similarly to Anna, Emma is married off with expectations that children, happiness and balls will ensue. This may not be an accepted reading, however what seems to happen is that the disillusionment with her marriage triggers a depressive episode, which later develops into what could possibly be Bipolar disorder. Madame Bovary becomes fixated on a friend of her husband, risking so much to see him and neglecting her baby and husband. At times, the love of M. Bovary is again recognized, however she is becoming more and more unstable as an individual.

The difficult thing to deal with in this story, is the confusion and difficulty faced by Emma's husband. He adores her, but is oblivious to the thought that she could act any other way than how she intends. Responsibility, agency and thought behind one's actions characterises any framework of ethics that exists today (and indeed has for a long time), so the thought that anyone around us could be acting against their desires and outside responsibility is not one we accept - not that we should accept it, but this means that such cases of mental illness become that much harder to deal with from the outside - because we can't reconcile someone's actions with who they seem to be.

A particularly powerful observation made here is that M. Bovary is so tentative around his wife, he wants to hold her and comfort her and make her happy, but he is afraid of how she will respond. This captures well that mixture of fear and longing that one faces when seeing someone experience this sort of difficulty (whether it's mental illness, drug addiction etc).

In a way, it felt like Madame Bovary contained everything important that was in Anna Karenina (and only a third the size), however that may be because Anna Karenina has many religious excursions as Tolstoi attempts to reassert the importance of God in 19th century europe. It certainly didn't excite me to go out and read War and Peace as quickly as possible.

Both books deserve to be read.

The strange case of Dr. Jekyl and Mr. Hyde and a picture of Dorian Gray

Reading these stories, one after the other, I was surprised at the similar themes. Both stories explore the dark nature lurking in man that is only overridden by the ego during a process of individualisation. For both protagonists, that dark nature is alluring and disgusting simultaneously.

Despite the far-fetched nature of the stories, set around the 1900s, the stories have a lot in them in terms of self-exploration. After reading Jekyl and Hyde, i'd been told that it was one of the first novels to have homosexual overtones (which I didn't really pick up on), but this was perhaps mentioned to me because of its similarity to the Wilde book rather than anything else. It is a pity, in a way that Jekyl and Hyde has been retold so many times that many are unlikely to return to Stevenson's original (short) story, with so much depth to it. The writing style is one that makes me feel more intelligent just having read it, reminding me that there is a limit to what one can get out of simple writing styles like that of Murakami.

Some of the description in these two books is done so well that one is left quite disturbed, especially with the respective central scenes of bludgeoning violence. I found myself more uncomfortable in the presence of Dorian Gray than of Hyde, the latter being more straight forward and less insidious, but this is deliberate on the part of Wilde.

The version I had of Dorian Gray also had a review at the end that severely criticised the book - quite an emotive attack. It was interesting to read. Essentially it thinks the idea is executed dully - I disagree, that that is the extent of my enlightened review.

Gatsby, Meaulnes and Nagasawa

I read The Great Gatsby - that classic American Novel - well after reading Norwegian Wood (Haruki Murakami) and shortly after Le Grand Meaulnes (Alain-Fournier). The former had reidentified it as one of those books I should read, while the latter's title (obviously) reminded me to get to it. The similarity between the titles apparently might not have been accidental, with Fitzgerald having recently read Le Grand Meaulnes but I'm not sure of the facts here - the stories are different enough, however they do share the first person removed third person perspective - i.e. the title character's story is told from the perspective of a friend.

I think it's this narrative device that might be why Gatsby is so important as a text - beyond its essential Americanness. What this enables is a projected authenticity concerning the plight of the subject (e.g. think of the difference in impression one gets from "i am good" and "he is good"). Gatsby and Meaulnes are similar characters, sharing a similar friendship with the respective narrators. Both are talented, driven, and caught up in a romance that has strayed from the more genuine feelings of love to those of obsession and objectification. The narrator's friendship is undervalued (which is accepted gracefully in both cases) and it just seems to become more and more clear that these admired men, have somehow missed the point (sort of a Kurtz-esque fall).

In Norwegian Wood, Watanabe befriends Nagasawa, and what they share is a love of Gatsby. Nagasawa is of course, a reincarnation of the Gatsby character, and so reading Fitzgerald's novel fleshes out their friendship and allows us to better understand his function in the novel. This is my favourite thing about intertextuality, so much is inferred just from a deliberately placed reference... I think it's why I want to read so many of the "classic" texts - so that my reading of everything else can be enhanced.

I loved Gatsby, but mainly for a passage at the end, which I think justifies everything that precedes it (I didn't find the style to really flow so well... lots of re-reading to work out what's going on - but that's probably my fault - who am I to say it's not perfect?). The passage is this:

"It was all very careless and confused. They were careless people, Tom and Daisy - they smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their money or their vast carelessness, or whatever it was that kept them together, and let other people clean up the mess they had made..."

Sometimes books will use 150 pages of description and skeleton story, just to allow a reflexion like this to make an impression on the reader, so powerful and beautiful, that might not otherwise have been made.