I know we have consistently decided that there is no concrete message/point to this novel. However, after completing it, I feel I can make an attempt at finding meaning to all the madness. At the close of the tale, we learn that all the major characters were simply Gould's aliases (404). If you reflect on the story and think about all the interactions between Gould and these aliases, as well as their independent actions, it is impossible to discern any true events that transpired within this story. I think this contributes to Flanagan's purpose of proving that this novel is parallel to reality because its plot moves in circles and its characters are undefinable (also can be viewed as one big circle of people).
This notion came about through comparing the author's motives to those of Jane Austen's in Northanger Abbey. Austen intentionally kept her novel from having a concrete plot and sequence of important events in order to prove a point and poke fun at traditional Gothic novels. By the same token, Richard Flanagan intentionally makes discerning the true narrator and purpose of the story impossible in order to make his novel more like real-life, which he would argue moves "in circles" while most novels are ordered "as ladders" (358). He contradicts this notion on page 377 when the Commandant "realizes" that life is linear. I believe Flanagan does this from the perspective of the delusional Commandant in order to poke fun at the idea that life is linear. Overall, it is my (probably incorrect and grossly simplified) opinion that Flanagan's purpose behind this book was to show that traditional cause-and-effect novels cannot possibly represent the complex circularity of reality, while at the same time touching on other fascinating social conundrums, such as that of defining insanity.
I definitely agree with this idea that the novels small undefinable or almost indescribably subplots create circles that parallel life. I think that's really what makes this book so beautify written, because Flanagan doesn't tell a story but rather leaves a lasting thought. This is so evident in our discussions in class when literally everyone interprets parts of the book and the the book itself in different ways.
ReplyDeleteI think another really relevant thing about this book is that even though we all came out with different interpretations of the novel, everyone agrees on the book's theme of truth. This deepens the book's idea of multiple truths and definitions since it doesn't just present multiple truths, but it also drives very different but all equally valid interpretations.