The Dirty Ginger Man

April 26th, 2010 — 4:33pm

What to say about The Ginger Man.

Sebastian Dangerfield is the ginger man in question. He is an American living with his British wife, Marion, and their baby, Felicity, in Ireland. But that doesn’t keep Sebastian from drinking his way through their finances and sleeping with any woman who will have him.

The writing, by J.P. Donleavy in the 1950s, is very stream-of-consciousness, to the point where there are places where the narration changes from third to first person without any warning.

Sebastian rolled near, pressing the long, blond body to his, thinking of a world outside beating drums below the window in the rain. All slipping on the cobble stones. And standing aside as a tram full of Bishops rumbles past, who hold up sacred hands in blessing. Marion’s hand tightening and touching in my groin. Ginny Cupper took me in her car out to the spread fields of Indiana.

There is no designation to warn you that the point of view is changing. It makes skimming very difficult, I’ll tell you that much.

Once you get past the shock of Sebastian drinking until his liver gives out and having sex with anything that moves, the book is really rather boring. Because nothing else really happens. And Sebastian is kind of a jerk. As in, he pawns Marion’s things and then spends the money to buy alcohol. Donleavy tries to alleviate Sebastian’s jerkiness by having him realize that he is a jerk, that he’s self-aware and feels bad about the things he does. But that doesn’t make him a lovable rogue. He’s almost amoral in his quest to flee from his responsibilities. There are comedic sections, and Sebastian is indeed charming at times……but he still basically manipulates everyone he knows. It’s frustrating because Sebastian doesn’t change and doesn’t seem to learn any lessons. It really honestly is mainly about a man who likes to drink.

However, I can see how the book came to inspire a chain of pubs. And I look forward to going to the one in Houston.

Comment » | modern

We Have Always Lived in the Castle by Shirley Jackson

April 16th, 2010 — 7:22pm

So I kind of cheated this week.

There was a release of a new printing of Shirley Jackson’s We Have Always Lived in the Castle with an Edward Gorey-esque cover that was irresistible. So I forsook The Ginger Man briefly and read that instead.  Ooops.

Most people are familiar with Shirley Jackson by either her short story “The Lottery,” in which a seemingly modern village holds an annual lottery to choose who will be sacrificed and stoned to death by the townspeople, or her novel turned Owen Wilson/Catherine Zeta-Jones/Liam Neeson movie The Haunting of Hill House. And if you are familiar with those works, you know that the Shirley Jackson oeuvre can be downright creepy.

Such is the case with We Have Always Lived in the Castle, which opens with the narrator, Mary Katherine “Merricat” Blackwood, stating that the villagers have always hated them (them being Merricat, her sister Constance, and their Uncle Julian Blackwood). Indeed, the first chapter goes on to describe Merricat making her weekly errand run in the village and being harrassed by children and adults alike, the children who taunt her with a playground rhyme:

Merricat, said Connie, would you like a cup of tea?
Oh no, said Merricat, you’ll poison me.
Merricat, said Connie, would you like to go to sleep?
Down in the boneyard ten feet deep!

The rhymes origin is from an event at the Blackwood house that occurred six years earlier — one night at dinner, the girls’ parents, their younger brother, and Uncle Julian’s wife were all murdered by arsenic that had been mixed into the sugar bowl and used by the family to sprinkle sugar over their dessert of blackberries. The only ones to survive were Merricat, who had been sent to bed without supper, Uncle Julian, who didn’t use a lot of sugar but has been ill from aftereffects of the poison since then, and Constance, who never took sugar on her berries. Because Constance fixed the dinner and had washed the sugar bowl, she was the main suspect, even going through a murder trial until she was acquitted of the charge.  However, the people of the village still believe that Constance was the murderer and have since ostracized the family, turning Constance into an agoraphobe; she hasn’t left the confines of the house and the yard in six years.

And so they have lived in their somewhat peaceful existence. Merricat is a bit of a feral child, or at least a whimsical one — she makes little protection spells by nailing her father’s old things to a tree or burying things, like a box of silver dollars, and she runs around the land around the house with her cat, Jonas. Constance seems to spend her day cooking, taking care of Uncle Julian, and shaking her head and saying, “Silly Merricat.”

But of course, there is a change in the air. The change in question is the sudden arrival of their cousin Charles, who claims to be their father’s brother’s son. He tells them that his father would never allow him to contact them while he was alive, but now that his father is dead, he has come to do his family duty by showing up at the their house, moving himself into their father’s old room, appraising all of their things, and making thinly veiled threats to Merricat, who is instantly suspicious of him:

“Cousin Charles?” I said, and he turned to look at me. I thought of seeing him dead. “Cousin Charles?”
“Well?”
“I have decided to ask you to please go away.”
“All right,” he said. “You asked me.”
“Please will you go away?”
“No,” he said…”As a matter of fact,” he said, “come about a month from now, I wonder who will be here? You,” he said, “or me?”

Okay, maybe not so thinly veiled. But Merricat retaliates by listing all of the poisonous mushrooms in their yard, so that shuts him up for a while.

Charles argues with Uncle Julian, who is constantly confused between what is and what isn’t reality (at one point, he says that “my niece Mary Katherine died in the orphanage of neglect” when she’s standing in the room with him, which makes you wonder for a split second if you’re having a “The Sixth Sense” moment), and Merricat runs off to their old family shed and talks with her dead family members, who all fawn over her in a way that is super super creepy. She returns to the house for dinner, and when Constance sends her upstairs to wash her hands for dinner, she notices Charles has left a lit pipe in his room. She pushes it into the wastebasket that is filled with newspapers and innocently reports to the table for dinner.

Of course, a fire breaks out and Charles freaks out and runs to the village to get help, as if the fire burns down the home, then where would he get any more money? The villagers come to help, but they are overcome by the mob mentality and their hatred and fear of the Blackwoods, and they begin destroying the downstairs rooms, breaking and smashing things, all the while chanting the playground rhyme. Constance and Merricat hide in the woods, where they can watch and listen to the mob from a safe distance. Charles attempts to steal the family safe and it’s reported that Uncle Julian has died, presumably of a heart attack. While they’re watching the chaos, Merricat lays a bomb:

…and I said aloud to Constance, “I am going to put death in all their food and watch them die.”
Constance stirred, and the leaves rustled. “The way you did before?” she asked.
It had never been spoken of between us, not once in six years.
“Yes,” I said after a minute, “the way I did before.”

Wait…..WHAT!?

Yes. It turns out that Merricat was the one who poisoned and killed her family. But that’s really all that the book gives you. There’s no explanation, no reasoning behind it. Just an admission that’s almost an aside. All she says is that she put it in the sugar because she knew that Constance never took sugar. I don’t even know.

After the villagers leave, Constance and Merricat go back to the house and salvage what is left. Only the rooms in the top floor of the house burned, so they make do with the bottom floor and whatever material goods they have that the villagers didn’t destroy. Speaking of the villagers, they appear to be contrite about how they’ve treated the girls and begin to leave offerings of food and casseroles on their front porch. Constance waits until the cover of darkness to retrieve them, to make sure they’re really gone and no one can see them. The sisters live in the house on their own, and the final lines of the novel are:

“Poor strangers,” I said. “They have so much to be afraid of.”
“Well,” Constance said, “I am afraid of spiders.”
“Jonas and I will see to it that no spider ever comes near you. Oh, Constance,” I said, “we are so happy.”

Um, yeah. Okay.

To me, the most frustrating thing was the lack of explanation of the family’s murders. Merricat is a textbook example of an unreliable narrator. She’s eighteen years old, but has definite childlike qualities, such as her “protection spells” and the way she plays in the yard and in some ways the way she talks to Constance. But does that have something to do with the reason behind her poisoning the sugar? There was obviously some sort of intent behind it, as she tells Constance that she purposefully chose the sugar because she knew that Constance wouldn’t eat it. And, hi, why is Constance not freaked out about her little sister being a killer? The language is very straight forward, which also adds to the appearance of Merricat being an innocent child. Until she starts listing off how many ways she can poison you.

3 comments » | modern, Uncategorized

99. The Ginger Man by J.P Donleavy

March 30th, 2010 — 9:21pm

Cheer up, ginger kid.

A quick Wikipedia search of the next book on the list, The Ginger Man by JP Donleavy, reveals what I have to look forward to when it comes in at the library:

It follows the often racy misadventures of Sebastian Dangerfield, a young American living in Dublin with his English wife and infant daughter and studying law at Trinity College.

and,

A movie adaptation of the book was rumored in development with Johnny Depp playing the protagonist.

A book about someone who resembles Johnny Depp having racy misadventures? Hey-o!

The book, which was published in 1955, was first published in Paris and was originally banned for obscenity by the US and Ireland. However, the US and Ireland warmed up to the book — there are several pubs inspired by The Ginger Man in Dublin and several places in the US, including one in Houston. When bars are inspired by literature, everyone’s a winner.

Comment » | modern

The Magnificent….whatever.

March 28th, 2010 — 5:55pm

George Amberson Minafer is one of the most insufferable characters I have encountered. He made it impossible to get through this book. In doing some research for the book, I found out that in addition to the Orson Welles movie, The Magnificent Ambersons was also a made-for-tv movie in 2002. Jonathan Rhys-Meyers plays the role of George Amberson Minafer. If you are familiar with Jonathan Rhys-Meyers you will realize how perfect that casting was. No one plays a whiny bitchy snob like Jonathan Rhys-Meyers, god bless him.

Jonathan Rhys-Meyers as George

The Ambersons are an aristocratic family that made their money in the years after the Civil War; the way that the money was made is never really explained, just that they have lived in “magnificence” since 1873. None of them have really done much since then — one Amberson is in politics, but the rest of them just live off the family money. Isabel, Major Amberson’s daughter, married Wilbur Minafer, after stringing along him and another beau named Eugene Morgan, and gave birth to the unholy terror that is George Amberson Minafer.

What the book basically boils down to is George is a spoiled brat who is accustomed to getting whatever he wants. Of course, the deeper meaning is that time and money are fickle, as the Amberson family is losing their fortune and are unable to catch up to the Industrial Age. George pugnaciously refuses to give any stock to the “electric carriages,” opting instead to use horses.

George returns from college, and several people in the town remark on the fact that he is just as horrid as before and how they had so hoped that he would have “got what was coming to him,” and attends a party thrown by his grandfather. There he meets Lucy Morgan, and is instantly enamored. Lucy is the daughter of his mother’s former boyfriend, Eugene Morgan, who has moved back to the town to open a garage and start manufacturing automobiles. Lucy evades George’s seduction, the methods of which are basically one step up from him clubbing her over the head and dragging her back to his lair.

Meanwhile, George’s father, the emasculated Wilbur Minafer, has been in declining health for years, and he dies. (George doesn’t mourn much.) How convenient that Isabel’s old flame has arrived into town! Isabel and Morgan reacquaint themselves, much to George’s chagrin. George hates Morgan, because he doesn’t like cars and Morgan disapproves of the fact that George doesn’t work and has no aspirations to do anything but live off his good looks and family name. Because Morgan has sense. So George, who has his mother wrapped around his finger, becomes even MORE of a jerk. He has a giant temper tantrum when his aunt tells him about Isabel and Morgan becoming chummy, and when he bitches at a town gossip for gossiping, even though she wasn’t, he realizes that things have gotten out of his control. So he does the only logical thing — he convinces Isabel to take a trip with him to Europe and basically guilts her into staying, holding her prisoner by her own motherly affection.

While in Europe, Isabel grows sick. George is forced to bring her home, where she has a lovely deathbed scene, though George doesn’t let Morgan see her before she dies. Dick. Isabel’s father, Major Amberson, who is the patriarchal head of the Ambersons, dies soon after, and the Amberson land and money becomes entangled in legalities; it turns out that the Ambersons weren’t very good with keeping their wills updated. George is forced to get a job in a chemical plant, which pays him fifteen dollars a week. He has finally received his “come-uppance,” according to the people in the town. He has had to sell most of his possessions and is living in an apartment with his aunt Fanny, his father’s sister.

One day, while he’s walking through the town, he thinks he sees Lucy, who he hasn’t seen since he severed all ties with her due to his anger about his father dating his mother. He walks across the road to see if it was her, and he is hit by a car, proving that instant karma is indeed going to get you. However, the narration cuts to Morgan, who gets this weird feeling that Isabel wants him to go to see George in the hospital, so he does. And George asks for forgiveness. And Morgan accepts. And Lucy is at the hospital, facilitating this kumbayah circle, because she still loves George, I guess, I was annoyed at this point and wasn’t paying much attention.

There are a lot of great passages and reflections about time and youth that were pretty interesting, especially in regards to romance.

Youth cannot imagine romance apart from youth. That is why the roles of the heroes and heroines of plays are given by the managers to the most youthful actors they can find among the competent. Both middle-aged people and young people enjoy a play about young lovers; but only middle-aged people will tolerate a play about middle-aged lovers; young people will not come to see such a play, because, for them, middle-aged lovers are a joke — not a very funny one.

When I read that, I immediately thought of It’s Complicated, the romantic comedy last year with Meryl Streep, Alec Baldwin, and Steve Martin. Every time a movie with “seasoned” actors in the romantic roles come out, there is the question — does it appeal to younger generations? Or is it just, “ew, old people,” no matter what the story line?

Tarkington also has another zinger in regards to gossip:

“Gossip is never fatal, Georgie,” he said, “until it is denied. Gossip goes on about every human being alive and about all the dead that are alive enough to be remembered, and yet almost never does any harm until some defender makes a controversy. Gossip’s a nasty thing, but it’s sickly, and if people of good intentions will let it entirely alone, it will die, ninety-nine times out of a hundred.”

Gossip is like fire — don’t fan the flames and it won’t flare up and singe your eyebrows off.

Overall, The Magnificent Ambersons was a good book. Once I realized that this wasn’t a story of George becoming human and stopped waiting for him to redeem himself. I can see how it was important at the time, when there were these huge Rockefeller-Hurst-Carnegie families who had tons of money for generations, but rather than the changing of the guard, I found the relationships, both of the mother-son dynamic and the romantic relationships, to be the most translatable to today’s society. Dating your parent’s boyfriend’s daughter is just awkward, no matter what year it is.

1 comment » | classic books

100. The Magnificent Ambersons by Booth Tarkington

February 22nd, 2010 — 10:26pm

After a weekend full of bragging about my project and the wonderful things I had planned for myself, I finally got to the library to get the first book. Technically, it’s the 100th book. The Magnificent Ambersons by Booth Tarkington.

The What by Who?

Yeah. That’s what I said. Imagine my surprise that not only have I never heard of a book on this list, but there’s an author I’ve never heard of. “Booth Tarkington” sounds like an Internet quiz on how to get your porn star name.

After a quick Google search, I learned that not only was Booth Tarkington a state representative in the Indiana government, but The Magnificent Ambersons was made into a movie directed by Orson Welles in 1942. The novel won a Pulitzer Prize in 1919. It is also the second part of a trilogy that spans the years between the American Civil War and World War I. The Amberson family “serves as a metaphor for the old society that crumbled after the Industrial Revolution,” according to the review on Amazon.com.

Great. Social commentary for my first venture out into the world of Modern Library’s list. At least the book cover is pretty.

    Comment » | classic books

    What DO you do with a BA in English?

    February 18th, 2010 — 4:46pm

    When college has prepared you for a life of analyzing books and producing papers on the subtext, what jobs can you achieve?

    Not much, as it turns out.

    What do you do with a B.A. in English,
    What is my life going to be?
    Four years of college and plenty of knowledge,
    Have earned me this useless degree.

    I can’t pay the bills yet,
    ‘Cause I have no skills yet,
    The world is a big scary place.

    But somehow I can’t shake,
    The feeling I might make,
    A difference,
    To the human race.

    –Avenue Q

    I graduated from college two years ago and have found that my particular set of skills prepared me for nothing but trying to find opportunities to use the word “juxtaposition” in conversation. Try as I might, the classified section has yet to produce any advertisements for “professional reader.” What is a girl to do?

    Start a blog about reading, of course.

    Though I doubt it will make a difference to the human race, it will at least make the payment of my student loans seem worthwhile.

    4 comments » | musings

    Back to top