For reasons that are not entirely within my grasp, W or the memory of childhood was one of my favorite reads this semester. The duality of the narratives and the two parts of the books had a unique sense of a surprise element to them. While reading the book, especially as the narrator tries to recount his childhood, I felt as though I was unlocking the puzzle of his life with him.
The fragmented and unstable nature of the narrator’s memory really appealed to me in the book. The narrator seemed to be on a quest where he was negotiating with his mind, and it’s ability to hold memories. On page 42, he articulated an essentially reflexive feature of why he chose to write in order to re-trace his childhood memories, and it’s a quote that stuck with me from the book- “ I write because they left in me their indelible mark, whose trace is writing. Their memory is dead in writing; writing is the memory of their death and the assertion of my life.” There is a powerful sense of agency in Perec’s account of remembrance, and the way he chooses to build his memory. His writing taught me that the gaps in memory, and the imperfection of remembering is itself a vital part of the process.
The account titled “W” in the book, that is described as an island city governed by the spirit of the Olympics, begins as a euphemism to the brutal conditions that political systems create for citizens. Although seemingly distinct from Perec’s memories of childhood at first, we see the two accounts intimately intertwined with each other as we unlock the horrors of World War 2 in Perec’s account and the brutal conditions of survival in the land of “W”. All games, in essence, where the powerful actors exert control for resources for the common man, can have deadly consequences.
To conclude, the two accounts are not a master-class in symmetry, nor do they have a connection that is obvious and pleasant to its readers. Nevertheless, they teach us important lessons in how connections can be made across different epochs and socio-historical circumstances, and the missing puzzle pieces of memory that we seek to find may not make a perfect whole, but a fragmented mosaic. They teach us that after all, we’re all human, with a set of undeniable failings and pitfalls.
Food for thought:
I am interested to understand how readers perceived the impact of war and catastrophe on Perec’s recollection of memories, and his writing in general?
I think you make interesting points in your post. I felt his recollection was a little bit disturbing because it shows how the impact of war can really affect the way people remember things. It will have an effect on the rest of their lives and colour all the parts of it. I thought it was a really interesting way to tell a story though.
Hi Ashta. I like how you pose the question of memory and how Perec invites readers to reconstruct his childhood. Still, as you mention, memory does not operate as a coherent whole but with fragments, associations to objects, images, fables, etc.