My three book groups had interesting and varied conversations about THE GATHERING. Some people disliked the book. "It was too dark." I expected to hear that. Many of the reviewers reported that the darkness was a complaint voiced by readers. "The protagonist is a whiner. She should get on with her life. Why does she hate her husband so much?"
The unexpected comment, voiced by several readers was, " She drove me crazy. She told a long story and then said,' Oh, that probably didn't happen at all.'" A few people found it puzzling that Enright's book won the Booker and a favorite of theirs, THE RELUCTANT FUNDAMENTALIST didn't.
A few people loved THE GATHERING, the writing, the unpeeling of the onion, the uncertainty of memory. One thrapist particularly found it rewarding reading.
In spite of the unpopularity of Enright's book in the groups, the conversations were stimulating, particularly in one group. What do we remember? Has it always happened the way we remember it? Did we have recurrent dreams etching a false memory in our brains? Did someone tell us a story that became part of our memory? On and on, the conversation went. Did we ever imagine how our grandparents met, allowing an overheard conversation to serve as a sprouted seed for our own beanstalk?
When something hideous happems in our childhood, do we try and file it under trash and forget it? Later, when we are adults, looking for the reason for a tragedy, resurrect the memory. but not the memory exactly right? And so we talked, beginning to recognize how the protagnist worked her way towards an acceptance of her loss, both of her brother and the exactitude of her memories. Some people liked the discussion but remained negative about the book.
Enright's fist paragraph tells us exactly what she is going to tell us, but as we read the book, we don't remember what she has said is her goal. She tries things out on us and we buy in, then she says maybe she's wrong..and we are frustrated. We want to trust the memory she doesn't trust. She isn't lying to us but some readers feel she is playing with our minds. She is as dependable a narrator as most writers or readers are. In fact, perhaps she is more dependable because she tells us of the possibility of her misremembering. We don't want to believe that she remembers wrong..perhaps that is the human condition..then do we trust our memories?
I asked the group, "Whyis the entire book written in from Veronica's point of view with the exception of a chapter towards the end, which is written from her grandmother's point of view. Enright is such a careful writer, it;s hard to believe the choice didn't have good reason.
The writer's choice is not something we often think about when we read a book. The book is published, respected or disrespected, but it is complete. It exists. To think that the writer had other choices threatens the idea of a completed book. Writers know that there are always choices to make. Do they tell the book in the present tense. From whose point of view? In first person or third? The choices continue.
Recent Comments