I'm done now. I found this the best of the three too, with the beginnings of a point emerging. I've had a quick chat with E about this though, and it's very unclear what the point is. And - in a real blast of proper (maybe not) reader - reception theory and other twaddle, I'm not sure the point I'm taking is what Powell meant, but, as with the French revolution, it may be too soon to say.
Anyway, I'm beginning to find Widmerpool the most interesting of the lot. Quiggin and Members are too obviously archetypes of the main strands in 1930s literary society to be of interest, while Templer (and obviously our narrator) is pretty much a plot device. But I think what is interesting about Widmerpool is how his rise is reflected. I have a feel that Powell hated people like that, and creates this monster (not a horrifying one) to showcase just how awful he felt new men were and how mystifying their rise was to him, while his main protagonist flutters away publishing a mysterious (and presumably quite bad) novel doubtless backed up with some private income and a non-job, affecting this slightly tedious affectation of the world rushing past him. Stringham and - plot device notwithstanding - Templer are much more sympathetic - at least they do things (and fuck up badly). In some senses of course, I'm reacting to Jenkins because there is something of that aspiration in me - he is probably the best dinner option of the lot, but it's not a side to be proud of.
Oh, and Andrew, you're not a Quiggin. I suspect there are no bollocks 'ultra-modern' dialectical theories coming out of your work - I'm willing to bet there will be in his.
Sunday, 16 November 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Hello. I am a friend of Marcus Walker's and saw your Facebook group, and thought I might join in the reading. I am just coming to the end of The Acceptance World. Out of interest, what does anybody else think of the power v sensuality theme? This has struck me, particularly in a Buyer's Market. It is one to look out for in future volumes.
John
John, you would be more than welcome. I think we need an email address to set you up, but we'll add you in. One can never have too many voices to give their thoughts on interminable novel sequences.
E-mail is jolliffejohn@yahoo.com - thanks very much. The blog looks good.
John
Post a Comment