I really liked how this final novel seemed to link back to Marcel Proust’s novel (our very first book in the course) with the mechanism of using a train/subway to represent motion wether in time for Proust or in different stories for Luiselli’s novella. I think its interesting the emphasis on the subway being below the surface and that is what is relevant, where the dead linger as the novel puts it. I found the author’s style of writing interesting, even as there was at least more than one story they were almost interlinked. From when it would go to her revelling in her youth or then return to the picture of her being interrupted by her children. I thought it was a little weird how she described her children as the “boy” or the baby and how they were such a bother in her life. But even as some of the parts of the books were linked in their story themes, these interruptions from her family also caused an interruption in how readers read the story and paused at places where it seemed we would finally hear a longer anecdote. The addition of the poet, Owen was also peculiar to me, because we move from a female centred perspective to that of a male, but he is still part of this novel and its stories? Like how they were connected, with the mention of a red coat and how ghosts connected the different narrators. I think if anything the book represents how fragmented and all over the place the writers thoughts were. I know she kept insisting to her husband that her writing is fiction, but I think the scene of her in the family home may be a symbol of being confined in a space and that her life is constantly interrupted, too much so to write a coherent continuous book. And even the ghosts, I find it hard to believe they were fiction, but rather reminders of people from her life in the apartment which she often gave away spare keys of. However the part about Owen seemed to be somewhat fictional, to me, like the idea of the family model I wonder if Owen is another model, used to orchestrate her story.
My question for the rest of the class is about the use of ghosts, how do you think they were used to describe the life of the author in different stages, how did Owen put it to describe the woman?
Naz, interesting connection to Proust! You make a very good point of the subway. I think it reminds me a little of Ren’s blogpost. The gender difference between the two narrators is something I hadn’t thought about. I think it becomes doubly interesting when we think about who is writing who. I think the house as “a symbol of being confined in a space and that her life is constantly interrupted,” is a very interesting one too. Especially when contrasting her apartment with this now home built by an architect.
Thanks for your comment!
– Tesi
Hi Naz! I really enjoyed reading your blog this week, I also found that the ghosts stuck out to me! In response to your question, I though that the mere presence of the ghosts in a way that wasn’t meant to be scary and eery, but instead, in this text, served as a reminder, at least in my eyes, of the ‘connection’ weaving in between the female narrator and Owen.
Hi naz, i loved how you connected the book to that of proust’s! In this novel, ghosts aren’t just spooky; they’re symbols for memories and issues from the author’s past that haven’t been dealt with. Think of the subway scenes as a journey through these hidden parts of her life, similar to the train rides in Proust’s work we read at the start. The story jumps around a lot, from her life as a mom—where she finds her kids kind of annoying—to other stories. This choppy style makes you stop and think, especially when her family life keeps butting in. Then there’s Owen, this poet guy, who brings a dude’s perspective into what’s mostly her story. The ghosts tie everything together, showing how our past, especially people we’ve lost or left behind, sticks with us. Through Owen’s eyes, these ghosts seem to show how the author’s history shapes who she is, blending her past with her present.