The Trenchcoat by Norman Manea has me feeling uncertain, and confused. So, I can only say that Manea has achieved his goal. The writing itself was a big contributor to this as it often consisted of run-on sentences as well as repeated words that almost felt like ad libbing in my head. Not to mention the Kid/The learned/The researcher/The guileless, one who honestly still remains a mystery. At one point I thought that everyone thought the trenchcoat belonged to another woman that Bazil was seeing behind Dina’s back, but looking back, even that I may have misinterpreted.
I think it is interesting how the trenchcoat was described as being so bland with no features that made it stand out, yet it was those very attributes that made the trenchcoat a central piece in this novella. In a way, it also compels the reader to become fixated on this trenchcoat and uncover its true position in the book. Everything feels so tense and uptight in this story because of the political context of Romania at the time and the ominous presence surrounding the characters that the presence of a bland, simple coat, even put me on the edge as a reader. I found myself so hung up on trying to overanalyze the trenchcoat so that I can understand the theme and meaning of this novella as a whole. I think that in itself is quite ironic because now I question my approaches towards books as it almost felt like I was forcing myself to view it as a symbol rather than as a simple trench coat. I think over-analysis in some instances can be good because it can help uncover hidden themes or things that other people may have not thought of and elicit conversations and questions. In the case of the trenchcoat, I think it was far more impactful to see the way that Manea had described. Simply as a coat, but one that represents such a prominent symbol to the characters in the novella.
Watching the lecture with Norman Manea really helped enlighten some of my thoughts of the novel. He mentions how the trenchcoat was the emblem of the security office that controlled and manipulated everybody and that in itself is representing dictatorship. My favourite part was when he mentioned that it was often worn by those of the secret police which were so common that ¼ people were part of it. This makes me question now that maybe everyone in the novella was so uptight and freaked out about this overcoat that they were questioning if Bazil or Dina themselves were an informant. Perhaps at the end it is revealed that Dina and the nameless pupil are both informants, but I am still uncertain. Watching the lecture also helped a lot with this book as well, especially given the political context of Romania at the time. I think overall I quite liked the trenchcoat, but even that I am unsure of.
My question for this book would be: How would you say that you like approaching novels, and how did you find that affecting your reading of The Trenchcoat?
Hello! I felt like the trench coat being so plain and unassuming was purposeful so readers could feel a similar sense a confusion and worry which the characters felt. The descriptions of the trench coat also make you wonder if there is a hidden meaning behind the article of clothing. To touch on your question, I do not think I approach novels in a specific way. Although, I did have high expectations for this novella, and I felt that I was let down in some aspects.
Hi, to answer your question, I think this book made me do a different approach, where many things in the book just left me confused or wondering what happened, but I think that was what the author was trying to do on purpose where Manea is trying to show the reader experiencing what it’s like for the characters in the book.
hello!
personally, I enjoy reading books that encourage thinking and have a greater meaning. I discovered that, in “The Trenchcoat,” I really liked how the author incorporated symbols—such as the trenchcoat—to give the narrative more depth. It increased my interest in the novel by getting me to reflect more on the characters and their experiences.
To be honest with all of you, this is probably the book that has left me most dissatisfied. But maybe I’m a bad reader of this type of literature! On the one hand, this novel asks us to read each expression carefully, in a paranoid way… although personally I would not like to get too involved in that game. Perhaps, as Professor Beasley-Murray implies in the lecture, this is an achievement of the author in terms of narrative form.
Hello great post, to answer your question I typically like to take a slow and steady approach to reading but I feel this novel is best read at an exceedingly quick pace. I think taking your time with this novel would cause further confusion for people as each element of this story relies heavily on the elements that come before it and forgetting one detail may cause you to completely misunderstand or not understand a scene at all.
Hello!
To answer your question I like personally enjoy a fast-pasted novel as it keeps me turning the page, so this one was a bit hard for me. I definitely didn’t catch a lot of the little details because I was waiting for something dramatic to happen. So I definitely found myself confused for most of this novel.
Super enjoyed reading this post!
– Maya Berrached