If I were to pick a word that reflects this story, I would choose “remember”. The narrator uses the word remember consistently throughout this book to introduce his certainty about a specific memory, for example: “I have a vague memory” “I don’t have a precise memory” “I do not remember” “I can hardly remember”, all of which are evident on more than one occasion. There is so much fragility and uncertainty tied to the memories he discusses, while some also holding a clear sense of familiarity. His memory is clearly a source of frustration for him as he has unreliable and fragmented memories of his family or his childhood forcing him to imagine the gaps; “whom I imagine, rather than remember” (pg 94). I get the sense that the narrator has a weak sense of identity and this lack of memory for the significant events in his life causes him stress. He has no problem recounting the “statistical details” (pg 41) of his parents, these are the facts that he can count on. But, his lack of emotional attachments to memories with his parents was sad, and unfortunately, this was likely a common reality of children growing up during the war as their important developmental and familial relationships were disrupted by violence and displacement.
The context of Nazi occupation and the second world war was important to consider as the narrator worked through his variable memories. He clearly experienced many tragic and traumatic experiences at a young age that he has now repressed, perhaps as a coping mechanism, relying on photographs, “statistical details”, and remnants of memories to form an understanding of his childhood. Given the volatility of the time, the censorship of names and true identities also adds to this confusion and uncertainty. For example, he mentions, “I could have been told that my father’s name was Andre, my mother’s Cecile and that we came from Brittany” (pg 35) reflects the way that the censorship of identity during that time would have been, and clearly was, confusing for a child. We can understand why the narrator’s blank memory is the result of trauma and while this is clearly a source of frustration for him, perhaps ignorance, in this case, is bliss? This is my question this week: Do you think that the narrator’s gaps in memory work as a form of protection and is a good thing or do you think that despite how tragic and traumatic his memories were that knowing is better than always wondering?
Going back to our first lecture in which we discussed the purpose and meanings we attach to reading, I thought the narrator’s descriptions of books as a ‘material for rumination and of a kind of certainty’ (page 142) were interesting. The narrator expresses his love for reading coming from the certainty and reliability that books offer; unlike his memory that is fragmented and abstract. He describes the comfort he finds in rereading books, knowing that the book is ‘telling a story you could follow’ (pg 142), unlike his childhood that offers no linearity or logical order of events. This perspective of reading as a form of escape and comfort is similar to the meanings that Proust attached to reading. Nevertheless, I found it interesting to read Perec’s thoughts about reading, providing a sense of comfort through the reliability of the words. However, this book offers no reliability or certainty, providing us with no conclusive account of his childhood, reflective of postmodernist literature as variable.
You say a lot about one strand in the narrative. I wonder how you see the other strand (about Gaspard Winckler and W) fitting in with what you have to say about memory and identity?
[Oh, but please do use the category “Perec” and some tags… “memory,” for instance? Thanks!]
I found the other narrative more difficult to interpret. I see feelings of abandonment evident in both narratives, but I was confused with the way the second narrative switched so dramatically in the second half of the book. I didn’t really understand why the story was so focused on the Olympic games. I’ll keep thinking about it! Also I added some tags, sorry I forgot.
That’s fair enough. We’ll talk more about this next week! But I think it’s important to keep both narratives in mind… as Perec says, what he’s trying to say somehow lies not in one or the other, but between the two.
Anna, I like the approach you take to this blog post with the word “remember” (similar to what was done in class on Lispector’s text), as well as the connections that you make to ways of reading from Proust discussions. I’ve added your question to our list of possible discussion topics (the first of many to follow!), and I look forward to discussing this text more in class next week with you.
Hi Anna! I love your blog post, the word remember is super important to the book, as it is something he struggles with and makes him irritable and angry at himself. I think that his unconscious memories he cannot remember are protecting him from the violence and ptsd he may have from the war. However I believe that it is vital to know our childhood so we can be strong in our identity of ourself. Unfortunately because of the trauma, his brain has adapted to protect him and I don’t think he will ever fully remember.
Hi Anna!
I really enjoyed your blog post and thought it was very insightful! Thank you so much for this. To answer your question: Do you think that the narrator’s gaps in memory work as a form of protection and is a good thing or do you think that despite how tragic and traumatic his memories were that knowing is better than always wondering? I would say that it possibly is both? It is important to conceal memory to protect oneself. It depends on the person. If that memory has a benefit to you knowing and working through then it would be a good thing as well.
Hi Anna! Thank you for your post. I like your approach on the memorial aspect of the book, and I think a large part of it is based on the author’s own traumatic experience during WW2. Also, the social aspect of censorship is not only prominent in the time of Nazism, but also a tool for population control in any dictatorship in the past, present, and future. To answer your question, I believe his “forgetfulness” is intended to protect him from recalling the painful part of his memories, acting as a defense mechanism.
Hi Anna! I agree that his lack of childhood memories may have caused him to also struggle with his identity. I think his gaps in memory are a defense mechanism to perhaps protect him from the trauma that occurred in his childhood. However, it seems that the defense mechanism that was supposed to protect him is the one that is actually doing more damage to him. I think perhaps it may be better for him to know, rather than to always be wondering and imagining the possibilities of what happened.
Hi Anna, thank you for your post! To answer your question, I believe it is better for the narrator to ‘forget’ some of the events in his memories. As one of the classmate has mentioned, it is acting as a defense mechanism to help the narrator forgetting the painful memories he had been through.