In the "wide sargasso sea" I thought that the writing style was very confusing and utterly misleading. The author jumped around quite a bit from character to character. What do you think was one of the most confusing points???
One of the most confusing parts in that book was the beginning when it seemed like her life was not making sense. It was as if all the characters were put in a blender. It was so confusing chronologically too. It was hard to put events in order. I thought that the different perspectives were brilliant to understand the two different sides but the change in perspective was also confusing because the change was not exactly stated.
I agree! In the very beginning, I was losing faith in the book already, and that there was no way I was going to understand it. By the end though, you knew what was happening.
I would like to reiterate Emily's point above. The changing perspectives of the story definitely created an interesting atmosphere, but at what cost? I argue it is the authors job to create not only an intriguing story but one that carries a logical point. If the ending (which was outstanding)was meant to be the payoff for such a eradicate read then it came short. In this case the end does not justify the means.
I must agree with Hunter on this one. The writing should evoke both strong emotion and deep intellectual thought if done properly, but in "Wide Sargasso Sea", I believe that the pathway leading to that deep thought turned into a curvy road to nowhere. The plot had many twists and turns which rather than giving me the thrilling ride I desired, left me car sick, and without any destination. The unorthodox change of narrator should have given a dramatic kick that would have intrigued even the most seasoned reader, but it was executed with poor timing and revealed little new information to the reader. The new narrator's perspective was still centered directly around Antoinette, allowing no room for potential plot expansion. Although I must applaud Jean Rhys for her creativity, I must also condemn her works, as they were not executed with either miraculous thought or stunning presentation.
I thought Wide Sargasso Sea was a clear cohesive story. The changing perspectives were easy to understand and interpret with context clues and a firm understanding of older English. Think for a second if you would about all that was accomplished and linked (to Jane Eyre) in such a short span. Without changing characters several times at no point would we have such a firm understanding of the back story.
I definitely think that if you read (and understood) Jane Eyre, then the story should have made at least some sort of sense. The events of the story were kind of mashed in together tightly, though. I am on Hunter's thought process here.
I disagree with both of you, but only because with no interest came no desire to figure out the confusing story. I am sure if the book was about some Special Forces raid on a P.O.W. site or something, but still swapped narration throughout the characters, I would like and understand it. This however, no.
You may be right after all hunter, changing viewpoints and perspectives can add another element to a book or story a lot of times, and possibly if I had found some interest in the storyline itself, I could have followed it easily. I agree with matt all the way, the story and the context of the book can make all the difference, for even a well written book can be torturous to read if the story itself is boring and pointless to the reader.
Today I, Dr. Hansen, want to write a blog in PaceSpace. This concept is fairly mundane, but has an infinite amount of possibilities, correct? Correct. Now I am thinking of the concepts of "Wide Sargasso Sea" and of how my slippers are making my feet quite sweaty, although I will leave the latter out of this particular blog. Now I am punching some keys, and throwing down some words; this is major progress! But wait, before I finish, I am going to change the perspective to that of my dog, Gunner! That will be crafty. -Bark, bark. Sniff, sniff. Lick, lick. Sleep.- Now wasn't that a creative insight on this blog? The answer should obviously be no. A random change in narrator midway through a story is horribly confusing! I am willing to be a small part of my left arm that you, the reader, had not the slightest clue what my intentions of writing were. Hell, I nearly confused myself. Although it was done slightly differently in "Wide Sargasso Sea" the concept is still the same, a change in narrator in the middle of a story is simply confusing! No matter the new insight or amount of new information that is brought in, changing the narrator will always confuse the audience, and that is why "Wide Sargasso Sea" will be lost upon nearly all readers young and old.
Your short story was still easier to follow than the book. And I might say a bit more interesting too. I certainly got more out of your post Dr. Hansen than the book. I completely agree with your post.
What an excellent assessment Dr. Hansen the use of your amusing anecdote in this situation made it very easy for layman to grasp the concept of this post.
There isn't a whole lot else to be said about this. All of my thoughts have been voiced already by everyone else. So if you would like to continue reading, go for it. Just a redundant post. The book has no clear sense of direction, randomly jumping around. I had no interest in the beginning, so I found it completely and utterly useless. If I enjoy a story, then I will be imagining what is going on in it, I am sure you guys feel the same. But if the story is pointless and hard to follow, I am just reading words in my head. I might as well be reading a newspaper article, or a post in a blog that is as pointless as mine, either way it will be a better read than "Wide Sargasso Sea."
I couldnt agree more, I had the same problem. I lost intrest so bad at some points, I would realize that I had read an entire page or two without absorbing any of it. I cannot even remember how many times I had to go back and reread a page or two.
Overall I did not care very much for the book, it is with this tainted opinion that I offer the following thoughts on the book. I felt that the author did not get Mr. Rochester's character correct. I felt that I was reading an entirely different character set rather that that of the one that was originally proposed in Jane Eyre. As it has already been stated, the shift from perspective made the book very difficult to follow. Not only because it interrupted the flow of the book, but also because there was little indication given to whom the perspective shifted to.
I completely agree Logan. The story was semi-interesting then all of a sudden the reader has no idea what is going on in the story. The flow was completely destroyed and the book is basically ruined due to this shift in viewpoints.
Wide Sargasso Sea was a most interesting read and not because I enjoyed it. The book is simply impossible to follow. The narrative is boring and the story is just plain depressing. Like many of the others who have posted before me the change in the point of view was ver confusing. We went from reading from the point of view from an interesting young girl to the blatantly boring narration of a stuffy british man. It was very confusing. We were thrust into a part of the story that we had absolutley no idea about. I literally spent the rest of the book trying to piece together what happened from the shift in viewpoint.
Try looking at the story form the authors point of view, if you were to write a book about a women who goes mad and has been locked in a closet for years, how would you approach that? Wouldn't it make sense to not make the book make sense?
I thought that the change in narrration and character perspective throuoght the book made it nearly impossible to follow, and many of the events within the book just confused me more and more. I thought that the bouncing around chronologically took my confusion and made it grow exponetially. Just as you would start to get into one storyline, it would shift into another time, or viewpoint and you would lose interest once again.
That is exactly how I feel. It was not a book that wanted to be on the best sellers list. It was also not needed. Nobody cared about why bertha was a complete creep. There is no need for this book especially with new modern sciences because we know that people that are messed up have issues in the past. There is no need for a book to explain this basic concept.
I enjoyed the change in narration in "Wide Sargasso Sea." Obviously the author was trying to confuse the reader purposely in order to make the reader stop and think. Literature is not always meant to be easy to read and understand. The author's confusing writing style exemplifies the divergent vernacular orginal to the Carribean culture. As the author grew up in the Carribean her representation was versimilar to real life dialect. Also think of the symbolic effect of the story. The story is about a woman who eventually goes mad, and perhaps the author is trying to give the reader an intimate look into a mad persons mind by jumping around, and confusing the reader. A mad person would not think as we think and things would make sense to him or her that do not make sense to us. Or perhaps the author was quite mad herself.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteOne of the most confusing parts in that book was the beginning when it seemed like her life was not making sense. It was as if all the characters were put in a blender. It was so confusing chronologically too. It was hard to put events in order. I thought that the different perspectives were brilliant to understand the two different sides but the change in perspective was also confusing because the change was not exactly stated.
ReplyDeleteI agree! In the very beginning, I was losing faith in the book already, and that there was no way I was going to understand it. By the end though, you knew what was happening.
DeleteI would like to reiterate Emily's point above. The changing perspectives of the story definitely created an interesting atmosphere, but at what cost? I argue it is the authors job to create not only an intriguing story but one that carries a logical point. If the ending (which was outstanding)was meant to be the payoff for such a eradicate read then it came short. In this case the end does not justify the means.
ReplyDeleteI must agree with Hunter on this one. The writing should evoke both strong emotion and deep intellectual thought if done properly, but in "Wide Sargasso Sea", I believe that the pathway leading to that deep thought turned into a curvy road to nowhere. The plot had many twists and turns which rather than giving me the thrilling ride I desired, left me car sick, and without any destination. The unorthodox change of narrator should have given a dramatic kick that would have intrigued even the most seasoned reader, but it was executed with poor timing and revealed little new information to the reader. The new narrator's perspective was still centered directly around Antoinette, allowing no room for potential plot expansion. Although I must applaud Jean Rhys for her creativity, I must also condemn her works, as they were not executed with either miraculous thought or stunning presentation.
DeleteI thought Wide Sargasso Sea was a clear cohesive story. The changing perspectives were easy to understand and interpret with context clues and a firm understanding of older English. Think for a second if you would about all that was accomplished and linked (to Jane Eyre) in such a short span. Without changing characters several times at no point would we have such a firm understanding of the back story.
ReplyDeleteI definitely think that if you read (and understood) Jane Eyre, then the story should have made at least some sort of sense. The events of the story were kind of mashed in together tightly, though. I am on Hunter's thought process here.
DeleteI disagree with both of you, but only because with no interest came no desire to figure out the confusing story. I am sure if the book was about some Special Forces raid on a P.O.W. site or something, but still swapped narration throughout the characters, I would like and understand it. This however, no.
DeleteYou may be right after all hunter, changing viewpoints and perspectives can add another element to a book or story a lot of times, and possibly if I had found some interest in the storyline itself, I could have followed it easily. I agree with matt all the way, the story and the context of the book can make all the difference, for even a well written book can be torturous to read if the story itself is boring and pointless to the reader.
DeleteToday I, Dr. Hansen, want to write a blog in PaceSpace. This concept is fairly mundane, but has an infinite amount of possibilities, correct? Correct. Now I am thinking of the concepts of "Wide Sargasso Sea" and of how my slippers are making my feet quite sweaty, although I will leave the latter out of this particular blog. Now I am punching some keys, and throwing down some words; this is major progress! But wait, before I finish, I am going to change the perspective to that of my dog, Gunner! That will be crafty. -Bark, bark. Sniff, sniff. Lick, lick. Sleep.- Now wasn't that a creative insight on this blog? The answer should obviously be no. A random change in narrator midway through a story is horribly confusing! I am willing to be a small part of my left arm that you, the reader, had not the slightest clue what my intentions of writing were. Hell, I nearly confused myself. Although it was done slightly differently in "Wide Sargasso Sea" the concept is still the same, a change in narrator in the middle of a story is simply confusing! No matter the new insight or amount of new information that is brought in, changing the narrator will always confuse the audience, and that is why "Wide Sargasso Sea" will be lost upon nearly all readers young and old.
ReplyDeleteYour short story was still easier to follow than the book. And I might say a bit more interesting too. I certainly got more out of your post Dr. Hansen than the book. I completely agree with your post.
DeleteWhat an excellent assessment Dr. Hansen the use of your amusing anecdote in this situation made it very easy for layman to grasp the concept of this post.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThere isn't a whole lot else to be said about this. All of my thoughts have been voiced already by everyone else. So if you would like to continue reading, go for it. Just a redundant post. The book has no clear sense of direction, randomly jumping around. I had no interest in the beginning, so I found it completely and utterly useless. If I enjoy a story, then I will be imagining what is going on in it, I am sure you guys feel the same. But if the story is pointless and hard to follow, I am just reading words in my head. I might as well be reading a newspaper article, or a post in a blog that is as pointless as mine, either way it will be a better read than "Wide Sargasso Sea."
ReplyDeleteI couldnt agree more, I had the same problem. I lost intrest so bad at some points, I would realize that I had read an entire page or two without absorbing any of it. I cannot even remember how many times I had to go back and reread a page or two.
DeleteOverall I did not care very much for the book, it is with this tainted opinion that I offer the following thoughts on the book. I felt that the author did not get Mr. Rochester's character correct. I felt that I was reading an entirely different character set rather that that of the one that was originally proposed in Jane Eyre. As it has already been stated, the shift from perspective made the book very difficult to follow. Not only because it interrupted the flow of the book, but also because there was little indication given to whom the perspective shifted to.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree Logan. The story was semi-interesting then all of a sudden the reader has no idea what is going on in the story. The flow was completely destroyed and the book is basically ruined due to this shift in viewpoints.
DeleteWide Sargasso Sea was a most interesting read and not because I enjoyed it. The book is simply impossible to follow. The narrative is boring and the story is just plain depressing. Like many of the others who have posted before me the change in the point of view was ver confusing. We went from reading from the point of view from an interesting young girl to the blatantly boring narration of a stuffy british man. It was very confusing. We were thrust into a part of the story that we had absolutley no idea about. I literally spent the rest of the book trying to piece together what happened from the shift in viewpoint.
ReplyDeleteTry looking at the story form the authors point of view, if you were to write a book about a women who goes mad and has been locked in a closet for years, how would you approach that? Wouldn't it make sense to not make the book make sense?
DeleteI thought that the change in narrration and character perspective throuoght the book made it nearly impossible to follow, and many of the events within the book just confused me more and more. I thought that the bouncing around chronologically took my confusion and made it grow exponetially. Just as you would start to get into one storyline, it would shift into another time, or viewpoint and you would lose interest once again.
ReplyDeleteThat is exactly how I feel. It was not a book that wanted to be on the best sellers list. It was also not needed. Nobody cared about why bertha was a complete creep. There is no need for this book especially with new modern sciences because we know that people that are messed up have issues in the past. There is no need for a book to explain this basic concept.
DeleteI enjoyed the change in narration in "Wide Sargasso Sea." Obviously the author was trying to confuse the reader purposely in order to make the reader stop and think. Literature is not always meant to be easy to read and understand. The author's confusing writing style exemplifies the divergent vernacular orginal to the Carribean culture. As the author grew up in the Carribean her representation was versimilar to real life dialect. Also think of the symbolic effect of the story. The story is about a woman who eventually goes mad, and perhaps the author is trying to give the reader an intimate look into a mad persons mind by jumping around, and confusing the reader. A mad person would not think as we think and things would make sense to him or her that do not make sense to us. Or perhaps the author was quite mad herself.
ReplyDelete