Can someone give a link to, or the author and title of, the article Heidi mentioned regarding the 4 levels of interpretation as applied to a great novel?
This was my first time reading The Warden, but having read The Way We Live Now and The Eustace Diamonds I was totally surprised by how slow and dry The Warden felt. The Way We Live Now has (literally) 100 chapters and it felt shorter than The Warden!
Such a great discussion! Sorry about my poorly worded not-a-question! Ha! That was actually supposed to be further thoughts on my ACTUAL question at the beginning of the thread. I am such a substack newbie. 😉 Can't wait to start on The Road. What a wonderful year of reading so far! ❤️
Help me, Close Readers--and maybe Heidi if she wants to chime in! What she describes about her experience reading The Warden--being morally opposed to the narrator’s evaluation of the character’s actions (is that a fair summary?)--is something I’ve experienced many times with the books we’ve read together. Laurus is a good example--as a Protestant, I do not agree that any person other than Christ can suffer to atone for someone’s sins. But I was encouraged by our community to suspend my disbelief (as with other books) and accept the novel on its own terms. If I morally/theologically disagree with the premise or conclusions of a book, that’s not a necessarily a flaw in the book. But it feels like that’s what Heidi is saying about The Warden. Am I connecting the dots correctly? Or am I grossly misinterpreting the discussion (which is very possible)?
Good question! There are plenty of books we read I don’t agree with. We’re about to read The Road, whose author is an agnostic, and I think the book is breathtaking. That’s what’s great about reading! My problem with The Warden is the intrusive narrator, who interprets for us. My quibble is formal & literary, not moral.
Thank you, Heidi! 🩷 How do I tell the difference between an author/narrator who is interpreting for us, and the terms of a novel? I guess my thinking is still murky on that point.
Does the author leave it to you to form your own conclusion? Or does he/she tell you what to think about it?
Honestly, even if an author does tell us what to think, it doesn’t necessarily mean it’s a flaw. It’s just not my preference. In this case I so profoundly disagreed with the author about his own book that it kept me from liking the book. 😂
Can someone give a link to, or the author and title of, the article Heidi mentioned regarding the 4 levels of interpretation as applied to a great novel?
This was my first time reading The Warden, but having read The Way We Live Now and The Eustace Diamonds I was totally surprised by how slow and dry The Warden felt. The Way We Live Now has (literally) 100 chapters and it felt shorter than The Warden!
Such a great discussion! Sorry about my poorly worded not-a-question! Ha! That was actually supposed to be further thoughts on my ACTUAL question at the beginning of the thread. I am such a substack newbie. 😉 Can't wait to start on The Road. What a wonderful year of reading so far! ❤️
Help me, Close Readers--and maybe Heidi if she wants to chime in! What she describes about her experience reading The Warden--being morally opposed to the narrator’s evaluation of the character’s actions (is that a fair summary?)--is something I’ve experienced many times with the books we’ve read together. Laurus is a good example--as a Protestant, I do not agree that any person other than Christ can suffer to atone for someone’s sins. But I was encouraged by our community to suspend my disbelief (as with other books) and accept the novel on its own terms. If I morally/theologically disagree with the premise or conclusions of a book, that’s not a necessarily a flaw in the book. But it feels like that’s what Heidi is saying about The Warden. Am I connecting the dots correctly? Or am I grossly misinterpreting the discussion (which is very possible)?
Good question! There are plenty of books we read I don’t agree with. We’re about to read The Road, whose author is an agnostic, and I think the book is breathtaking. That’s what’s great about reading! My problem with The Warden is the intrusive narrator, who interprets for us. My quibble is formal & literary, not moral.
Thank you, Heidi! 🩷 How do I tell the difference between an author/narrator who is interpreting for us, and the terms of a novel? I guess my thinking is still murky on that point.
Does the author leave it to you to form your own conclusion? Or does he/she tell you what to think about it?
Honestly, even if an author does tell us what to think, it doesn’t necessarily mean it’s a flaw. It’s just not my preference. In this case I so profoundly disagreed with the author about his own book that it kept me from liking the book. 😂
Another t-shirt quote for Heidi:
Everything I do is my
ready-to-talk-about-books pose.
😂🥂