Book Buddies: The Sea, The Sea by Iris Murdoch [Archive]

LitNetIsGreat

07-24-2010, 05:11 PM

Hi everyone!
I'd like to join! I read this novel some time ago and loved it. Iris Murdoch fascinates me in many ways and I'm looking forward to go through her work once more with you and share my thoughts. I'm going to read it in English this time.
How does this Book Buddies thing work, by the way?

Oh hi, great stuff and glad to see some positive remarks on Murdoch and this novel. Just post your thoughts here during or after you have read it.

I think I'm going to have to start reading this book tonight, even though I've still got a bad hangover from yesterday (dodgy pint) and I was going to save it for my holiday, I'm running short of stuff and want to start it now. I'll probably finish it on holiday though because I've got all sorts of things on.

Scheherazade

07-24-2010, 06:38 PM

Thought we were waiting till August!

LitNetIsGreat

07-24-2010, 06:49 PM

Well it's nearly August but I can just about wait if you want. I didn't get to start it tonight anyway as we didn't have any hot water (for my bath). I don't know, see what tomorrow brings.

Scheherazade

07-24-2010, 06:53 PM

I don't know, see what tomorrow brings.For your sake (and those of who happen to live with you) some hot water, hopefully - if nothing else!

LitNetIsGreat

07-24-2010, 07:14 PM

For your sake (and those of who happen to live with you) some hot water, hopefully - if nothing else!

Oh no worries, Mrs N just forgot to put the boiler on, tut, tut. Don't worry, I told her off...

prendrelemick

07-25-2010, 05:49 AM

Ok, ok I started it. Are we supposed to take the egotistical pillock Charles seriously or laugh at him?

Its so old-fashioned, untill it mentioned yellow volkswagons and Moterways, I thought it was set in the 50's

LitNetIsGreat

07-25-2010, 06:01 AM

Oh, right. I dunno I've not managed to start it yet. I'll read some later and get back to you. Not a good start for you then?

prendrelemick

07-25-2010, 04:00 PM

I wouldn,t say that. She is a very engaging writer. I read her early stuff, as a neighbour had them, and I must say I can really see her developement in this one. I love a well written phrase or two, and this is full of them.

LitNetIsGreat

07-25-2010, 04:01 PM

Excellent. I've not started it yet as I've had a busy day, but I've got the hot water on for later.

Kafka's Crow

07-25-2010, 05:55 PM

Excellent choice. I read The Word Child many years ago (in another life!) and loved it as I, myself, was a word-child at that time:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Word-Child-Vintage-classics/dp/0099429128/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1280093978&sr=8-1

I think I have a copy of The Sea, the Sea and The Black Prince, I have an ebook version on my iphone and iLiad for sure. Will start reading right away.

LitNetIsGreat

07-25-2010, 06:56 PM

Wonderful, it will be great to hear your thoughts on it too.

I've started it! Only to page 15, but I must say that I just love it. The prose is wonderful and witty and the little house on the rocks by the sea is just perfect. What a delightful start to a novel.

prendrelemick

07-26-2010, 07:00 AM

I wont say too much, I am nearing the end.
It is a comedy, a sophisticated farce. She is playing with us in a most delightful way. Her command of English is astounding, I use the word "command" purposely, she makes it do exactly as she wants, taking the concept of the mot juste to another level.

I have a few problems with the style, I keep expecting The Famous Five to come clambering over the rocks on one of their adventures.

Silvia

07-26-2010, 12:15 PM

uff...I still haven't got hold of an English copy. I should have placed an order for it as soon as I read you were about to discuss this novel...Tomorrow I'm leaving for Amsterdam: either I find a copy over there, or I'll have to trust my memory (which is awful) :confused5:
In any case, my comments will be a little late, hope it's not a problem. Is there a time limit for the discussion?
I'm glad to see that those who started reading the novel are enjoying it!

LitNetIsGreat

07-26-2010, 12:32 PM

No worries, no time limit. Yes, I'm looking forward to reading more of this tonight, been a little busy again.

LitNetIsGreat

07-26-2010, 06:33 PM

Oh, I'm lovin' this one - the Neely strikes again! True, I'm only on page 24 but I'm dreaming of the prose here.

Mac, I told you so, go with the title, can't fail it.

Wonderful, wonderful...

mal4mac

07-27-2010, 07:15 AM

OK Neely, you persuaded me to read the first five pages in "Look Inside!" The prose is excellent, and I kinda identify with the main character, and it's available in my local library. I think I'll chance it... Mick's "famous five" comment has worried me, but I've just re-read "Lord of the Flies" so a little bit of "famous five" wouldn't come amiss at the moment, might get the pig's head on a stick out of my mind...

- Mac

LitNetIsGreat

07-27-2010, 09:36 AM

Excellent, good fellow. Yes her prose is wonderful - I'm taking a break from work in a minute to read a little more. True Mick's comment about famous five is a little worrying (though amusing) however you shouldn't trust a Yorkshireman in such matters - read on!

prendrelemick

07-28-2010, 02:54 AM

The world the book has sprung out of, is definetely inhabited by the famous five. No gritty realism here. Strong emotions and actions are examined and explained until they lose their force and become abstract. Passions become words. This is not a criticism, I enjoyed this aspect of the book.

As Neely said "read on." (Trust me, I'm a Yorkshireman)

LitNetIsGreat

07-28-2010, 05:52 PM

Hmm, I certainly know where you are coming from with the idea that Murdoch is playing and manipulating us, it's very clear now.

I think I know what you mean in regards to the Famous Five comment, I'll have to read a little more to be sure though.

I must say that I'm enjoying the book, I'm just around page 110, though it is certainly changed from what I expected after reading the opening few pages. There is more to this novel than first meets the eye for sure. (I just hope it doesn't go down hill from here...)

Edit: I like it when he tells us what food and wine he is having; it's my favourite bit apart from the descriptions of the beautiful sea, I love the sea. Makes me think that I should hire a private chef again...

I'm feeling a bit phhufff, about the relationship stuff to be honest, I'd rather Murdoch just told us about the sea and food for 400 pages, that would suit me down to the ground completely. It's all interesting though.

Sch have you started it yet? We're not giving too much away are we, I don't think we are, just impressions?

Mick how far on are you out of interest?

Anyone else started it yet?

Dark Muse

07-28-2010, 09:10 PM

I would like to read this book, if I hurry up and finish Brothers Karamazov (I am a bit more than half-way through) I will try and squeeze it in my August reading, provided I can find a copy in time to start reading for the discussion.

prendrelemick

07-29-2010, 05:33 AM

I've finished it. (Its a library book and has to be returned soon) I'm not saying much - no spoilers, but I think we are generally in agreement so far.

What do you think of the intellectual philosophising presented as conversation or thought? Most was over my head, but I liked the Idea that in an artful lie there is still the truth of the art.

mal4mac

07-29-2010, 12:00 PM

What do you think of the intellectual philosophising presented as conversation or thought? Most was over my head, but I liked the Idea that in an artful lie there is still the truth of the art.

So that's a cross between the "Famous Five" and Heidegger then. You make it sound more appealing all the time, Mick :)

prendrelemick

07-29-2010, 12:30 PM

:lol: Add a bit of Graham Rix farce and you're closer than you think.

LitNetIsGreat

07-29-2010, 01:47 PM

I don't know about the intellectual philosophising, I might not have got to that bit yet exactly, though to me at the moment he just seems to be musing and facing the ghosts of his past in a rather literal manner...

I like the fact that he swims naked in the sea - I might do that next week...I'm sure the North Sea is warm this time of year...:cool:

mal4mac

07-30-2010, 05:32 AM

LitNetIsGreat

07-30-2010, 06:00 AM

Hey, hey, spoilers Mac, spoilers for them. Yes I'm a touch intrigued about the SM too, we'll see...

Funny you should question the description, cooking and swimming as for me these are some of the best moments of the book! The main pain for me is slow and deliberate musing about his past relationships, but there are obvious moments of interest in between pages and pages of thought so I'm expecting (hopefully) this labour not to be in vain. I do find the tension between the locals a little silly though, that's not working for me at the moment and I'm hoping by the end that they don't all love him and he becomes an accepted part of the community - famous five style perhaps?

I'm also wondering when the Buddhist friend is going to turn up and what the hell all that is going to be about. We'll see.

prendrelemick

07-30-2010, 06:21 AM

What's that monster about? Just say no...

I found the first thirty pages a pleasant enough read, but it's a bit slow. Too much description? Too much about his swimming and cooking exploits? Too much & too slowly trying to build up the tension between the locals and his old chums?

I'm also reading Nietzsche's "the Gay Science" at the moment, which is like being repeatedly struck by lightening bolts. So Murdoch is quite relaxing... so far... when's Chogyam Trungpa going to make an appearance?

Hey, hey, spoilers Mac, spoilers for them. Yes I'm a touch intrigued about the SM too, we'll see...

Funny you should question the description, cooking and swimming as for me these are some of the best moments of the book! The main pain for me is slow and deliberate musing about his past relationships, but there are obvious moments of interest in between pages and pages of thought so I'm expecting (hopefully) this labour not to be in vain. I do find the tension between the locals a little silly though, that's not working for me at the moment and I'm hoping by the end that they don't all love him and he becomes an accepted part of the community - famous five style perhaps?

I'm also wondering when the Buddhist friend is going to turn up and what the hell all that is going to be about. We'll see.

I don't want to say too much, but you are being deliberately "lulled" at present.

I was wondering if the monster was allegorical in some way, or a portent of the things to come. I don't know anything of the significance of sea monsters, I wonder if a knowledge Buddhism would help.

LitNetIsGreat

07-30-2010, 06:37 AM

OK thanks for the thoughts. I can well believe that we are being deliberated manipulated by her - a quite telling page of this for me is page 76 (of the vintage classic edition) though I don't want to go into detail for those who have not started as of yet but I'm thinking the part that goes "even if readers claim they 'take it all with a grain of salt' they do not really" and more besides.

*Possible Spoilers*

Yes the monster must be allegorical on some level or at least part of the whole idea of him coming face to face with his demons - as the women clearly are ghosts of his past in that sense. I'd rather read the whole book before making any more assumptions but from where I am at present (around page 150) this much is at least pretty obvious.

I've got a fair knowledge of Buddhism so I'd probably be able to deal with anything in that regards as or when it comes up!

mal4mac

07-30-2010, 10:52 AM

I've got a fair knowledge of Buddhism so I'd probably be able to deal with anything in that regards as or when it comes up!

I've read a few books on Buddhism, even tried a bit of meditation, but I wouldn't dare to say I had a "fair knowledge". What would you say that consists in? Naming all the Tibetan gods? Solving all the Zen koans?

LitNetIsGreat

07-30-2010, 02:27 PM

I've read a few books on Buddhism, even tried a bit of meditation, but I wouldn't dare to say I had a "fair knowledge". What would you say that consists in? Naming all the Tibetan gods? Solving all the Zen koans?

Oh bloomin' heck Mac leave it alone. I'm not saying I'm a Zen Master but I have enough understanding of it to deal with any likely concepts that this novel could throw up. I can't see that any degree of knowledge of Buddhism is going to be an essential element of reading Murdoch anyway.

mal4mac

07-31-2010, 07:05 AM

Oh bloomin' heck Mac leave it alone. I'm not saying I'm a Zen Master but I have enough understanding of it to deal with any likely concepts that this novel could throw up...

Me to! I can always respond "Oh bloomin' heck Neely leave it alone." Actually that seems very wise - are you sure you're not a Zen master? How would you know?

LitNetIsGreat

07-31-2010, 08:04 AM

Actually yes, I think it is entirely possible that I am some sort of Zen master - but I didn't want to sound big headed.

Oh, reaching a stage in the novel when I am finding things a little tedious. I feel it has gone a little downhill as was my fears, still more to come I hope. I blame Sch if not.

mal4mac

07-31-2010, 11:28 AM

Oh, reaching a stage in the novel when I am finding things a little tedious. I feel it has gone a little downhill as was my fears, still more to come I hope. I blame Sch if not.

I'll blame you Neely :)

*spoilers (to p.47)*

That first letter was very long winded, if slightly amusing. Murdoch used it quite well to enhance his image as Prospero, I thought - with the hints at the control he has over his "spirits" - the sad, simple actors... Wish she'd learned something from the bard about moving a plot along, though.

I wonder what her editor was like? I wonder if he dared to edit such a celebrity? I'm reading Carey's biography of William Golding at the moment and it's very good on the relationship between Golding and his superb editor, Monteith. Lord of the Flies was full of sea battles, H bombs going off, pseudo-Christian transmutations, etc, before Monteith got hold of it.

prendrelemick

07-31-2010, 04:26 PM

I feel a pep talk is in order.

Keep going Neely, you can do it.

LitNetIsGreat

07-31-2010, 04:47 PM

Yes, yes will do. I'm off on holiday Monday for a few days (how will Lit Net cope? :smilewinkgrin:) so there are no distractions with uni work and Lit Net! I'm taking this book and a few others so I'll get stuck in.

mal4mac

08-01-2010, 06:55 AM

* spoilers to p.130

I'm really starting to dislike Charles. He seems to combine the worst qualities of Prospero and Caliban. I'm also finding things very tedious - who was it who invented the phrase 'the banality of evil'. That's Charles - banal. Because there are no characters with any redeeming qualities (yet?) it just makes the whole novel rather banal.

I quite like the villagers, I keep on waiting for them to mess Charles around some more, boy does he deserve it! I'm hoping James is going to be a bit of a hero and an anti-Charles... where is he?

After forcing us to read this, Neely, I think you have a moral responsibility to finish it.

LitNetIsGreat

08-01-2010, 07:45 AM

Oh there is no question that I am not going to finish it, don't worry about that, it's just I've been very busy working on my dissertation research and had to drop it for a couple of days - no distractions next week though and I'll probably have finished it by Tuesday.

I quite liked Charles at the start but his adolescent-like infatuation with a girl (or mental ghost of a girl) he knew 40 years ago is all a bit phufff. He needs to get down to the sea and get naked very quickly. Murdoch also needs to start painting the sea again a bit more, that would keep me happy for a while. We'll see.

I might read a bit now actually and have a break for an hour. :gnorsi:

prendrelemick

08-01-2010, 11:11 AM

I think you are both exactly where Murdoch wants you to be.

Can't say much more yet.

LitNetIsGreat

08-01-2010, 11:36 AM

I think you are both exactly where Murdoch wants you to be.

Can't say much more yet.

Hmm, intrigued.

At page 230, getting a little better here, though I wouldn't call this a great; it's fair.

mal4mac

08-02-2010, 06:26 AM

Hmm, intrigued.

At page 230, getting a little better here, though I wouldn't call this a great; it's fair.

* spoilers to p.229 *

I agree, it's getting better. I was incredibly disappointed with the first appearance of James. But the first serious talk with the old flame is going well. I quite like her, but she seems to have incredibly bad luck with men.

Murdoch is playing with us quite well, I feel. I also started off quite liking Charles, and felt a bit sorry for him getting dumped by Hartley. But now I'm feeling, "well done Hartley!"

She's being very coy about why she dumped Charles. Although, "who wouldn't", we must surely now all be thinking! Is she after Charles' money, to get away from her mad, bad hubby? Why couldn't/didn't she get rid of mad, bad hubby?

prendrelemick

08-04-2010, 04:02 AM

Possible spoilers:

I was very dissappointed by Hartley. But that was the result of the big build-up she got.
It all revolves around the reliability of the narrator, And ties in with the speculation of what is true and what is truth, what is real and what (to paraphrase Prospero) is the stuff of dreams. That is just one of the threads that runs through the book.

mal4mac

08-04-2010, 06:11 AM

Spoilers to p.400

I'm now also disappointed with Hartley, apart from her rejection of Charles. She's settled for a very restricted life, and comes out just as just worn down and weak. But Murdoch has to present her this way, I feel, to properly 'send up' Charles.

James has come through (at last!) as the admirable chap he was set up to be - this is a bit predictable and boring, but there are enough 'grortesques' to hand, we need someone sane!

I like James' conversations with Charles, very clever, you can see why Murdoch was a respected philosopher. James is right, of course, that Charles is trying to hold on to a lost ideal, a ghost of the past, in pursuing Hartley. His love for her is a long lost dream, and he needs to wake up. But his determination to pursue his ideal love, and his ripostes to Charles are quite strong.

Anyway, Murdoch is doing well at casting Charles as someone who is pursuing Plato's ideal form of love (in a warped manner), with Hartley as the spark that gets him going. (Plato's Symposium is must read here...) I tend to the view that there *are* no such ideals, that "love = sex + friendship", so this makes Charles' antics highly comic, as Hartley is (now) not sexually attractive, and how can you have a friendship with someone who wants to run away from you! So Charles thinks he's pursuing an ideal form of love, but he's really pursuing a memory of love, which is (of course) futile, what is past, is past.

prendrelemick

08-06-2010, 05:25 AM

Spoilers Alert;

Would you also say that Charles has become like Ben in his treatment of Hartley. Is that a nod to Neitzsche? He becomes the monster he is trying to defeat. In fact on page 371 he outlines a plan for them to hide away in a house by the sea! where Hartley can cook and shop and sew, while he paints the hall and does the garden. Thats in your face irony by Murdoch.

In fact when you get a glimpse of what other people think of Charles, His own thoughts of Ben are so similar

mal4mac

08-06-2010, 06:07 AM

Would you also say that Charles has become like Ben in his treatment of Hartley. Is that a nod to Neitzsche? He becomes the monster he is trying to defeat. In fact on page 371 he outlines a plan for them to hide away in a house by the sea! where Hartley can cook and shop and sew, while he paints the hall and does the garden. Thats in your face irony by Murdoch.

In fact when you get a glimpse of what other people think of Charles, His own thoughts of Ben are so similar

Phew, finished! Spoilers alert...

I think Charles has *always* been like Ben, or worse, in his treatment of Hartley. In the last few pages you get a sense of him coming to realise that it was his bossy, controlling, insufferable nature that drove Hartley away from him in the first place. I think Ben and Charles mirror each other somewhat in their shared monstrosity, bringing out the worst in each other, but that worst is already there in Charles, and always has been - look at the way he treated women, and James, and everyone else, before ever encountering Ben and Hartley.

I think Charles does change for the better after his interactions with James, he at least begins to gain some self knowledge and attains some healthy resignation with his "uncle" stance at the end. I guess a supernatural event would improve anyone! If you had convincing proof that heaven existed then you would become a good boy. Wouldn't you?

So what did you think of the novel overall? I thought it needed a good editor, it could easily be half the length. Murdoch often gets criticised for not being good at creating characters, but I think she did quite a good job on Charles - maybe she reacted to the criticism by bringing in so much interior monologue, biographical sketches, etc that no one could say she she hadn't fully filled out his character! Unfortunately I think that detracted from the other characters, who are all a bit two dimensional (at best).

Did you get the quick, veiled reference to Jane Austen's "Emma" - it was the bit about Charles not liking al fresco meals, like Mr Knightley (Emma's pal...) By bringing in such a small detail from Austen's novel she must have studied it and was perhaps flagging to her readers that she was trying to match Austen. Bloom might say she was revealing her anxiety of influence.

Having just read "Emma" I can see many parallels- - both are *long*. Both are centred on one character (Murdoch could have called her novel "Charles"!) Both contain varied "goings on" in a country setting, with several "dashings away" to London. Both have a large cast of secondary characters, and create considerable doubts in the reader's mind about "who loves who" and "what is actually going on".

There are even secondary characters moving to Ireland in both novels, and several other minor parallels, so Murdoch may have been playing a game of reproducing minor details to keep Austen fans awake! But I think Austen's novel is the resounding success - never did I feel it was too long, and Austen somehow manages to fill out *all* the characters, no two dimensionality visible. She also doesn't feel the need to bring in Sea Monsters and X-Men!

prendrelemick

08-06-2010, 09:39 AM

SPOILERS

Mmm, ok I will concede there are parallels with Emma. For example, both Emma and Charles realize they had been foolish and misguided by the end, as had the reader who had relied on them.

I'm always very cautious about calling parallels intentional, unless they are very obvious. The al fresco meals thing could be such a hint, as could the mention of Prospero, Also the title, a direct quote from Xenophon. I caught a whiff of The Famous Five and The Good Companions. The Odyssey? I could point out a Circe, a Calypso, a Penelope, and a Nausica. There are so many veiled references its hard to distinguish the significant ones.

I think Charles does change for the better after his interactions with James, he at least begins to gain some self knowledge and attains some healthy resignation with his "uncle" stance at the end. I guess a supernatural event would improve anyone! If you had convincing proof that heaven existed then you would become a good boy. Wouldn't you?

Yes I suppose James saved him from himself (ie the sea monster) as well as from drowning. or is that too simplistic. Was Titus the price - The sea had been cheated out of its first offering.

Overall I enjoyed reading it, it was mostly good. A more conclusive ending and less drag in the middle would have improved it I think. The prose was good, her discriptions were excellent. I can see the problem with characters she is reputed to have, they didn't quite ring true, in thought, word or action, especially Titus - a working class college drop out who sings duets in Italian.

LitNetIsGreat

08-06-2010, 07:01 PM

I've just got back from holiday (great time, stayed in the same hotel as Dickens incidentally, had nice weather) where I finished this, most of it was read on the train down actually and I never got to read it by the sea in the end, not that it matters where I read it like, anyway. I agree with what has been said about it in general and I haven't changed my opinion on it from my last post, certainly Mick's point here could more or less well be me own:

Overall I enjoyed reading it, it was mostly good. A more conclusive ending and less drag in the middle would have improved it I think. The prose was good, her discriptions were excellent. I can see the problem with characters she is reputed to have, they didn't quite ring true, in thought, word or action, especially Titus - a working class college drop out who sings duets in Italian.

I'd say that there was potential in Murdoch, there was definitely some good moments, flashes of great prose and some enjoyable aspects to this novel, but overall I felt that I wouldn't be running to read another Murdoch any time soon as this was nothing more than fair to good in places for me for the reasons I've already give - that plot and characterisation thing! Also I can never forgive it for not being the novel I'd imagined when I saw the title and read the first line of the blurb (I never read all of the blurb, it's immoral) never mind, I'm glad that I gave Murdoch a read anyway as she is/was a respected contemporary British author so I felt that I should at least read one of her works and I'm not totally unhappy that I did, but for me it lacked the quality that I probably expected.

I think that there is a huge amount of illusion and allusion in the novel yes and I'd even push the possible reading that none of these characters were quite to be believed on various different levels. I think that it was pushing the plot too far, for example, for all three of his dreary women to turn up on the same night - which is why I originally assumed that Charles was mentally facing these women as past ghosts as it were, (especially considering the idea of the monster) and even as it seems you couldn't dismiss such as reading, it seems that it was just part of the implausible plot - and actually I don't quite know what to think now (and to my shame I'm not really sure if I care really).

I must admit to being quite frustrated at times by the annoying list of characters (players?) and parts of the chugging plot. I'm certainly not saying that Murdoch isn't clever or that, just based on this one novel she is not worth reading again some time (just not right now) but it is pretty clear that this is a novel with many faults.

I'd like to make more comments but I've got train-lag and I'm sounding pretty incoherent to myself anyway and perhaps somewhat contradictive - I'm sure you know what I mean though. :)

mal4mac

08-07-2010, 04:57 AM

SPOILERS

Mmm, ok I will concede there are parallels with Emma. For example, both Emma and Charles realize they had been foolish and misguided by the end, as had the reader who had relied on them.

Who would rely on them?! Hmmm, OK, maybe a little in the first few chapters. I wonder if Murdoch got that initial burst of admiration, decaying quickly into loss of admiration, from Austen?

The Odyssey? I could point out a Circe, a Calypso, a Penelope, and a Nausica. There are so many veiled references its hard to distinguish the significant ones.

Emma, Odyssey, Tempest... - these are either mentioned explicitly or through characters and scenes. OK, Emma is referenced through a minor scene & Knightley, so that's a veil, but it's a pretty thin veil.

I think Charles does change for the better after his interactions with James, he at least begins to gain some self knowledge and attains some healthy resignation with his "uncle" stance at the end. I guess a supernatural event would improve anyone! If you had convincing proof that heaven existed then you would become a good boy. Wouldn't you?

Yes I suppose James saved him from himself (ie the sea monster) as well as from drowning. or is that too simplistic. Was Titus the price - The sea had been cheated out of its first offering.

I didn't see the sea monster as representing the bad part of Charles. It's long curvy neck conjured up pictures of Chinese/Tibetan dragons so I thought it was a premonition of something strange coming from the East, something really strange involving James. That panned out, so I guess I was right :)

Didn't Charles suggest that Titus was the charge made by the demons on James for using magic? All magic including white magic is bad magic. That's why James was *so* upset by Tutus' death, and the main reason, I suggest, why he killed himself.

Overall I enjoyed reading it, it was mostly good. A more conclusive ending and less drag in the middle would have improved it I think.The prose was good, her discriptions were excellent. I can see the problem with characters she is reputed to have, they didn't quite ring true, in thought, word or action, especially Titus - a working class college drop out who sings duets in Italian.

I quite liked the rambling, inclusive ending. Very true to life - but definitely dragged out too much, like the whole novel. My reservations about Murdoch, having previously read two of her lengthy novels long ago, remains. I don't feel much like reading another one, but I guess it's a fairly painless and somewhat stimulating way to pass the time.

Neely, this novel is generally regarded as one of her best, as the *fulfilment* of her potential, as were the other two I read (The Good Apprentice, The Philosopher's Pupil) so I don't think she, really, has much potential - not compared to the really great novelists, anyway.

I'm now reading "To the Lighthouse" which is wonderfully spare and fast moving in contrast. The way Woolf quickly gives insight into *all* the characters through jumping around between interior monologues is amazing.

LitNetIsGreat

08-07-2010, 05:27 AM

Oh now Woolf really is a different ball-game altogether, a supreme artist for me if you can marry yourself, and have the patience for her technique and the whole modernist school. Woolf is a big undertaking as she demands a lot from the reader, but I think the payoff is there for the dedicated. Woolf really seems to be the complete love or hate figure in literature.

mal4mac

08-07-2010, 05:35 AM

Bloom on Murdoch (p.645 Genius) has some interesting things to say pertinant to "The Sea, the Sea" [Genius p.645...] Note, he's a fan and has read all 26 of her novels and re-read most. He places "The Sea, the Sea" in his top five.

I think Bloom admires Murdoch because she is so explicitly into Shakespeare. He quotes A.S. Byatt, who suggested it was her Platonism that made her do this:

"Shakespeare is the Good, and contemplation of the best is always to be desired."

But:

"Shakespeare can influence only the strongest writers without destroying them: Milton, Goethe, Dickens, Dostoevsky, Ibsen, Joyce. Iris Murdoch ... bravely sought Shakespeare' s influence, with very mixed results."

"The Black Prince remains an admirable entertainment, almost an enchantment, but its reliance on Hamlet nearly sinks it."

"A Platonist novelist is an oxymoron ... Murdoch, uneasily transcendental, exploits the preternatural while purporting to reject it. But ... is there a living English novelist who manifests Murdoch's fusion of intellectual exuberance and storytelling drive?"

"Can one be a great novelist, true heir of Dickens, and not have written a great novel?"

"Moral imagination was one of Murdoch's strengths, but the representation of character finally evaded her."

"Too many of Murdoch's men and women are wild without being persuasive. Even her fiercest eccentrics blend into one another." [Spot on!]

"There are few [British] affinities, except ... Byatt... novelists I also admire like Will Self, Peter Ackroyd, and John Banville, are very different... Philosopher novelists are rare in English... One wants Murdoch to be a novelist who matters as much as Hardy, Lawrence, Virginia Woolf, and E.M. Forster, and so I will keep worrying this..."

prendrelemick

08-07-2010, 06:45 AM

SPOILERS

Who would rely on them?! Hmmm, OK, maybe a little in the first few chapters. I wonder if Murdoch got that initial burst of admiration, decaying quickly into loss of admiration, from Austen?...

I meant only that we have to rely on them for our information.

SPOILERS
Didn't Charles suggest that Titus was the charge made by the demons on James for using magic? All magic including white magic is bad magic. That's why James was *so* upset by Tutus' death, and the main reason, I suggest, why he killed himself...

Here we disagree completely. James was preparing for "the journey" before Titus' death. Also James claimed that death was not an occasion for remorse as Charles saw it. In fact saving Charles from drowning, had shown that James hadn't shed all ties with his current life - it was a false move on his journey- and he had to have another meeting with Charles to finally end his concerns with the world.

SPOILERS
I quite liked the rambling, inclusive ending. Very true to life - but definitely dragged out too much, like the whole novel. My reservations about Murdoch, having previously read two of her lengthy novels long ago, remains. I don't feel much like reading another one, but I guess it's a fairly painless and somewhat stimulating way to pass the time. ..

Perhaps the whole book was about Charles stepping off the "Wheel" for a time untill life reclaimed him at the end.

SPOILERS
Neely, this novel is generally regarded as one of her best, as the *fulfilment* of her potential, as were the other two I read (The Good Apprentice, The Philosopher's Pupil) so I don't think she, really, has much potential - not compared to the really great novelists, anyway..

I found it better written than her early stuff, but more complex and less funny.
..[/QUOTE]

I'm now reading "To the Lighthouse" which is wonderfully spare and fast moving in contrast. The way Woolf quickly gives insight into *all* the characters through jumping around between interior monologues is amazing.[/QUOTE]

Good luck with that.

mal4mac

08-07-2010, 10:53 AM

Here we disagree completely. James was preparing for "the journey" before Titus' death. Also James claimed that death was not an occasion for remorse as Charles saw it. In fact saving Charles from drowning, had shown that James hadn't shed all ties with his current life - it was a false move on his journey- and he had to have another meeting with Charles to finally end his concerns with the world.

James might have been preparing for an actual journey, but changed it to a journey into death through remorse at being a bad magician. Why, otherwise, would he kill himself? I've never heard of Buddhist monks recommending that fit sixty year olds should top themselves using Buddhist magic.

James may have *said* death is not an occasion for remorse, in the proper Buddhist manner, but that doesn't mean we have to believe that he didn't feel remorse - his humanity overcoming his Buddhism. Actually the failure to be a good, non-attached Buddhist would be further motive for his suicide.

I don't think Charles was ever off the "Wheel".

Are there any books of hers you would recommend *above* "The Sea, the sea"?

Did you get th reference to James' describing his friend as a Tulpa? I had vague memories of a Tulpa being some serious Buddhist thing, so laughed at Charles ignorantly mistaking it for the name of 'some tribe'. But then I pulled myslef up, I'm almost as ignorant as Charles - anyway I looked it up and it *might* explain somethings:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulpa

I like the idea that inasmuch as the mind creates the world of appearances, it can create any particular object desired as a Tulpa. So the 'monk' was created by James, maybe he was the sherpa who 'died'?

"A master of yoga can dissolve a Tul-pa as readily as he can create it; and his own illusory human body, or Tul-ku, he can likewise dissolve, and thus outwit Death. Sometimes, by means of this magic, one human form can be amalgamated with another, as in the instance of the wife of Marpa, guru of Milarepa, who ended her life by incorporating herself in the body of Marpa." - Evans-Wentz

Maybe the sherpa incorporated himself into James, and comes out for an airing now and again. Maybe James is now in Charles? That might explain his turn for the better! Or maybe James was in that box?

prendrelemick

08-07-2010, 12:44 PM

Ah, interesting. Perhaps we should take all the strange occurences and Charles' half baked theories a little more seriously.

As for her other books, I have only read her first 5 novels and only because a neighbour lent them to me. I recall them as being light weight up to this one, and quite funny. However when you read 5 books by the same author in quick sucession they tend to merge into each other in the memory. I shall look up a review or two to try and distinguish them, one from another.

LitNetIsGreat

08-07-2010, 12:56 PM

Yes I bet that there are 100s of such tangents in this novel, there is certainly depth to it in that sense, I just wonder if she could have improved some of the basics in order to make for a better novel? As in that quote from Bloom Mac posted "can one be a great novelist, true heir of Dickens, and not have written a great novel?" I suspect strongly no, and even as Bloom seems to rate her highly, he has obvious reservations about her talents as novelist. Maybe that's it, she is a great writer but not a great novelist?

mal4mac

08-07-2010, 01:36 PM

By most accounts she was a very good teacher of philosophy, with a broader base of knowledge than most. But I'm not sure if she's even that good a writer - better than most certainly, but that's not difficult...

I think you're right about the 100s of tangents. Surely Nietzsche is in there somewhere - Charles pursuit of fame as a mighty director is surely an example of "will to power". And Sartre's idea of pursuing an authentc existence = Charles' move to the sea. And who knows what else? This is what Bloom admires most, he keeps on harping on about how he wishes she was a better novelist because she entertains all these deep philosophical ideas. Who knows, maybe her time will come when everyone sees these tangents better. Maybe what I'm seeing as "needs editing" is really me missing tangential references...

mal4mac

08-07-2010, 01:40 PM

As for her other books, I have only read her first 5 novels and only because a neighbour lent them to me. I recall them as being light weight up to this one, and quite funny. However when you read 5 books by the same author in quick sucession they tend to merge into each other in the memory. I shall look up a review or two to try and distinguish them, one from another.

I think that's her, rather than you Mick :) Bloom has the same problem, and I can't remember the character of the other two novels I read at all! You could never make the same mistake with Dickens. Oliver, Nickleby, and Pickwick in the same novel - only if you have a stroke!