Thinking Activity: The Sense Of An Ending
This post is in response to the questions asked here
Click here to have a brief overview of the novel
2) Adrian's definition of history can be agreed with to a great extent. Even though this definition isn't really his (he quotes Patrick Lagrange, a French historian), the definition can be agreed with to a great extent. If we were ever asked to prove whatever we consider as history, we would realize how the half of it would be nearly impossible to prove. The reason being the 'inadequacies of documentation' as the definition mentions. Another important aspect is that of memory. One can never be sure of one's memory. Because a memory can be looked at differently by different people. In fact half of what we consider our memory are things told to us by others; and not what we have actually witnessed. Therefore it can be said that memory is bound to be imperfect. It is seldom reliable. But then the question remains: Why then is history, a certainty? Well one answer can be that we need something like history to learn from. Even if the documents are imperfect and even if our memories are unreliable, we need the certainty of history to remind us that certain actions and words proved failure at a certain point in time. Apparently the historical sense is more important to acquire than history itself.
4) Subjectively speaking, I agree with the statement. One of the many reasons why history is always subject to question is because of its subjectivity. For instance, the very narrative of Julian Barnes' The Sense Of An Ending is in first person narrative. The narrator, Tony Webster, narrates the events from his memory; which even he isn't sure about. The only document available for examination, which might give a new perspective towards to what happened, is Adrian's diary (which is never fully presented to the reader). All we have are the two pages from the diary and which don't speak of the events clearly. So, relying on Tony's narration of the events, would lead us to a distorted or even incomplete version of the historical events. However, given the situation, we don't have any choice other than relying on him.
12) All of us love to be on the safe-side or to put it in Tony's words 'peaceable'. But the question is, whether life is supposed to be lived on the safe-side or peaceably? Or whether it is ever possible to always stay on the safe-side in life? Barnes' novel, as A J Kirby argues, 'plays with the maxim that it’s better to regret the things you have done than the things you haven’t, and thus rages against living life complacently'. The novel portrays how Tony's attempts at being peaceable was an act of cowardice; an attempt of escape from responsibility of one's actions and their consequences.
27) Of course, the novel becomes difficult to grasp because of its unreliable narrator. The major events of the plot are narrated by Tony Webster's subjective and selective memory; who himself isn't sure at times, whether the vents occurred in the exact pattern and nature as he narrates. And this is established from the beginning of the novel. Apart from the subjectivity of Tony's memory, it is his misunderstanding regarding the intrigues and conflicts of the relationships between him, Adrian and Veronica, that makes him the unreliable narrator. As the quote suggests 'he isn't up to the level of his own story'. The truth regarding Adrian's suicide and his relation with Veronica comes as a shock not just to the reader but to Tony also. Thus, it can be argued that Tony is as oblivious to the events as the reader and therefore is unreliable. Tony, as a narrator, isn't the authoritative narrator or storyteller, found in traditional literary texts, who knows everything that the reader or listener wants to know.
29) After reading the novel, one is left reflecting on one's own actions. We start thinking about all the times we made mistakes and wonder whether our mistakes affected people around us. But, that is just one aspect of what the novel is about. As the quote mentions, it is also about how we 'remember' what we have done. Our memory is selective. Usually when we narrate our experiences of the past, we would narrate in such way that either the would consider us a victim or a survivor. This is because while narrating we blame or held others responsible for our actions. Thus, not only do we narrate misinterpreted or misunderstood events but also seldom take responsibility of our actions; especially our faults. Thus, our memories are always partial. This is true also of Tony, the narrator of the novel, who narrates the events through his partial and selective memory. This is why the realization regarding Adrian jr.'s identity, comes as a shock to him. He feels not guilty but remorse; not just for his actions but also for how much wrong he was in his narration of the events as well as how he remained oblivious to the 'damaging' consequences of his letter.
Click here to have a brief overview of the novel
2) Adrian's definition of history can be agreed with to a great extent. Even though this definition isn't really his (he quotes Patrick Lagrange, a French historian), the definition can be agreed with to a great extent. If we were ever asked to prove whatever we consider as history, we would realize how the half of it would be nearly impossible to prove. The reason being the 'inadequacies of documentation' as the definition mentions. Another important aspect is that of memory. One can never be sure of one's memory. Because a memory can be looked at differently by different people. In fact half of what we consider our memory are things told to us by others; and not what we have actually witnessed. Therefore it can be said that memory is bound to be imperfect. It is seldom reliable. But then the question remains: Why then is history, a certainty? Well one answer can be that we need something like history to learn from. Even if the documents are imperfect and even if our memories are unreliable, we need the certainty of history to remind us that certain actions and words proved failure at a certain point in time. Apparently the historical sense is more important to acquire than history itself.
4) Subjectively speaking, I agree with the statement. One of the many reasons why history is always subject to question is because of its subjectivity. For instance, the very narrative of Julian Barnes' The Sense Of An Ending is in first person narrative. The narrator, Tony Webster, narrates the events from his memory; which even he isn't sure about. The only document available for examination, which might give a new perspective towards to what happened, is Adrian's diary (which is never fully presented to the reader). All we have are the two pages from the diary and which don't speak of the events clearly. So, relying on Tony's narration of the events, would lead us to a distorted or even incomplete version of the historical events. However, given the situation, we don't have any choice other than relying on him.
12) All of us love to be on the safe-side or to put it in Tony's words 'peaceable'. But the question is, whether life is supposed to be lived on the safe-side or peaceably? Or whether it is ever possible to always stay on the safe-side in life? Barnes' novel, as A J Kirby argues, 'plays with the maxim that it’s better to regret the things you have done than the things you haven’t, and thus rages against living life complacently'. The novel portrays how Tony's attempts at being peaceable was an act of cowardice; an attempt of escape from responsibility of one's actions and their consequences.
27) Of course, the novel becomes difficult to grasp because of its unreliable narrator. The major events of the plot are narrated by Tony Webster's subjective and selective memory; who himself isn't sure at times, whether the vents occurred in the exact pattern and nature as he narrates. And this is established from the beginning of the novel. Apart from the subjectivity of Tony's memory, it is his misunderstanding regarding the intrigues and conflicts of the relationships between him, Adrian and Veronica, that makes him the unreliable narrator. As the quote suggests 'he isn't up to the level of his own story'. The truth regarding Adrian's suicide and his relation with Veronica comes as a shock not just to the reader but to Tony also. Thus, it can be argued that Tony is as oblivious to the events as the reader and therefore is unreliable. Tony, as a narrator, isn't the authoritative narrator or storyteller, found in traditional literary texts, who knows everything that the reader or listener wants to know.
29) After reading the novel, one is left reflecting on one's own actions. We start thinking about all the times we made mistakes and wonder whether our mistakes affected people around us. But, that is just one aspect of what the novel is about. As the quote mentions, it is also about how we 'remember' what we have done. Our memory is selective. Usually when we narrate our experiences of the past, we would narrate in such way that either the would consider us a victim or a survivor. This is because while narrating we blame or held others responsible for our actions. Thus, not only do we narrate misinterpreted or misunderstood events but also seldom take responsibility of our actions; especially our faults. Thus, our memories are always partial. This is true also of Tony, the narrator of the novel, who narrates the events through his partial and selective memory. This is why the realization regarding Adrian jr.'s identity, comes as a shock to him. He feels not guilty but remorse; not just for his actions but also for how much wrong he was in his narration of the events as well as how he remained oblivious to the 'damaging' consequences of his letter.
Comments
Post a Comment