A Single Man by Christopher Isherwood

[Cally]

It's fascinating to try to put this sort of inner voice on pause, isn't it Deb?  When I was doing the questions I kept thinking 'but in the movie....'

I realize it's tough to answer some of these things with just the book in mind, but do appreciate the attempt to do this.

Oh...and welcome back Deb (and Tony).  And welcome Sara!

Thanks!  Yes, am having to be very strict with myself - interesting comparison with BBM SS/film.

[tfferg]

When he remembers his Nanny, he thinks about how Nanny and the child George were living in a “tiny doomed world.”  (Later we learn that this sense of doom stems from the rocket wars which were feared during the nuclear arms race, when the book was written.)

Yes, and the narrator must have been born, like the author, before World War I in a family, a social class, a sense of secuirity, a country and ways of thinking that were doomed to catastrophic change from 1914 onwards.

[tfferg]

I'm glad I haven't seen the film yet.

[dejavu]

I'm glad I haven't seen the film yet.

Tony, I was wishing I could see the film again (it's gone from theaters here, and the DVD isn't out yet) because I was starting to forget so much of it, but now I think that forgetting might be a blessing in disguise, at least until we finish discussing the book.

[Nikki]

1.)  The opening of this book is quite unusual and breathtaking - the description of a person coming to consciousness, moving from 'it' to 'he', reflecting on mortality and finally identifying itself as 'George.'  What is your opinion of the opening of the novel?  Is it unique or does it remind you of other books or authors?  How did the passage affect you - does it draw you in or put you off?  Please share your thoughts on this interesting passage.  

The opening is stunning and, for me, necessitated a couple of re-readings before I was able to internalize my own feelings about George.   George is dehumanized by the "cold reminder" that Jim is dead and he fines himself defined by his grief into an "it."  The "harassed stare" he sees in his mirror along with the changes in his physical state practically paralyze George.  Only after he takes care of his bodily functions and prepares for the day is he able to face the reality of the man who is George.

I felt drawn in by how George was distraught by grief to the point of losing his  human identity-- his "Georgeness" if you will -- and, to me, this opening was a powerful insight into George's feelings for his dead lover. The opening was unique in the sense that it was one of the most powerful depictions of grief that I've read in a long time.

[Nikki]

I haven't seen the film and I am glad I haven't yet, because, for me, it would taint my discussion of the book.  Although I've heard and read critiques of the film, it doesn't affect my understanding and impressions of the characters.  It makes it a lot easier to come to this discussion without the film buzzing around in my head.

[Nikki]

2.)  From the second paragraph of the book with the certainty 'it will come' to the notion of fear of being rushed to the awareness of Jim's death we are immersed in questions of mortality from the very outset of this book.  What do you think of Isherwood's addressing this topic so early in the book?  Is it heavy handed or morose - or do you feel that he is skillful enough as an author to make even fears that we would normally approach fiction to escape interesting?  Did the early introduction of issues of mortality put you off or did you find it compelling (or did it have another effect on you entirely)?

I suspect that these questions of mortality may have been on Isherwood's mind, since he was so much older than his real life lover. (I may be wrong.)  Also, mayn't Isherwood have been influenced by the horrors of WWII?  I didn't find it off putting at all, in fact, I think many of us who have lost loved ones, or been affected by the deaths of friends as we get older are aware of our own mortality.  Someone told me after my mother died that I was being faced with my own mortality.


Isherwood is skillful enough to depict death and grief so realistically that I was drawn in immediately to learn about this man and his lover who affected him so profoundly.

[Nikki]

3.)  George and Jim fell in love with the house George now lives in the first time they saw it.  They loved it because you could only get to it by the bridge across the creek.  George refers to it as 'our own little island.'  Do you think that George and Jim were attempting to isolate themselves here?  If so who or what are they trying to isolate themselves from?  Does this relate to their being a different couple in the neighborhood?  Do you think the house still fits George or has it become something different without Jim - perhaps a prison?

As lovers, I do think the men savored the romantic isolation the house presented for them  -- "their own little island." However, since they were so different from the rest of their neighbors, the isolation probably enhanced the privacy that they naturally craved.  Also, there was perhaps a feeling of safety in this isolation that they may have been aware of.

I think George would have been better off moving -- the house has become a prison, and has contributed to the children's awareness of his difference -- living alone, "That Man," the role George finds himself playing as the neighborhood "monster."  It was certainly unhealthy for him mentally.

[dejavu]

I felt drawn in by how George was distraught by grief to the point of losing his  human identity-- his "Georgeness" if you will -- and, to me, this opening was a powerful insight into George's feelings for his dead lover. The opening was unique in the sense that it was one of the most powerful depictions of grief that I've read in a long time.

That's interesting, Nikki, because up until the end of the second mini-section (when George reaches the bottom of the stairs and suddenly "knows, with a sick newness, almost as though it were for the first time:  Jim is dead.  Is dead") -- until that moment, I hadn't recognized the dissociation between George's mind and body as grief.  In that first section, we see George thinking about his own life and his own mortality, but don't get a clue as to what event in George's life might have set off his preoccupation with mortality. 

So I would agree, it does require some rereading of several sections in tandem.  The opening mini-section takes on more meaning, once you have read further into the book.

[dejavu]

3.)  George and Jim fell in love with the house George now lives in the first time they saw it.  They loved it because you could only get to it by the bridge across the creek.  George refers to it as 'our own little island.'  Do you think that George and Jim were attempting to isolate themselves here?  If so who or what are they trying to isolate themselves from?  Does this relate to their being a different couple in the neighborhood?  Do you think the house still fits George or has it become something different without Jim - perhaps a prison?

That was a picturesque description of the house’s location:  reachable only by the bridge across the creek, isolated by the cliff and trees to the back.   Since the location was the reason they fell in love with the house, I suspect that they were trying to isolate themselves here.  However, it’s interesting that they ignored the yellow sign which gave them fair warning of the children in the neighborhood.  It may have been the coziness of the location (the unusual bridge, and the inviting fireplace) which appealed to them.  They didn’t really set out looking for a remote location, just one in which they could imagine themselves cut off from the nearby neighbors.

What were they trying to isolate themselves from?  Prying eyes, nosy questions, and social invitations, no doubt.  And the location gave them a sense of safety, as Nikki noted.  They preferred to remain wrapped up in their own cocoon.  I would guess this stemmed from them being a “different couple,” although not necessarily from them being gay.  Young childless heterosexual couples may have done the same, in a neighborhood where there was such a strong, almost regimented, emphasis on having children and raising families.

ETA:  I don't necessarily think that George should move.  His house is small; he often feels protected by its smallness, because there's not enough room to feel lonely.  And he has the books in his living room to keep him company.  With a more positive attitude toward his life, I could see him being quite happy here. 

[dejavu]

4.)  What do you make of George's relationship with the children in the neighborhood?  Do you think he seriously dislikes or is irritated by the children?  Is his reaction to the children due to his being alone now?  Do you think that his reactions to the children have further isolated him in the neighborhood - set him apart from his neighbors with children?

Interesting question.  George and Jim knew, when they moved here, that there were children in the neighborhood, because the yellow sign warned them.  George probably didn’t have any serious dislike of children at that time.  But he did have a temper back then, because we know he tried to hide his temper from Jim; that’s part of his personality that hasn’t changed.

It seems likely to me that Jim’s death has led to George’s preoccupation with mortality and the awareness of his own aging.  Now, he’s not just reacting as a mature adult;  he’s become a symbol of a man going through a crisis of middle age.  And as a result, I think the noisy, silly play of the children irritates him more now than it would have before.  Now, he is more prone to outbursts of temper toward the children than he would have been before.

These outbursts probably do cause the neighbors to talk (something like, “Poor George, he just can’t cope with all these kids around”).  But Mrs. Strunk is the only neighbor whose mindset we get  some insight into in the early part of the book.  Her primary concern is for the children; she hopes George will get his sagging bridge fixed before someone gets hurt.  But she feels no hostility toward him; she merely seems to feel sorry for him being alone.

[dejavu]

I have a question that I'd like to throw out which relates to the passage about Mrs. Strunk hoping George will get the sagging bridge fixed before one of the children gets hurt.  This passage, the 11th "mini-section," is at the top of page 32 in the latest edition.  It begins with the words, "Twenty minutes later, Mrs. Strunk, out on her porch, watering the hibiscus bushes..." and ends, "...Poor man, she thinks, living there all alone.  He has a kind face."

Question:  The rest of the book so far as been from the point of view of George or "it."  This little section seems to be from Mrs. Strunk's POV.  Do other readers here agree that those are really Mrs. Strunk's thoughts, or do you feel that this is just what George, from his own POV, imagines Mrs. Strunk to be thinking of him?

[elena]

1.)  The opening of this book is quite unusual and breathtaking - the description of a person coming to consciousness, moving from 'it' to 'he', reflecting on mortality and finally identifying itself as 'George.'  What is your opinion of the opening of the novel?  Is it unique or does it remind you of other books or authors?  How did the passage affect you - does it draw you in or put you off?  Please share your thoughts on this interesting passage.
2.)  From the second paragraph of the book with the certainty 'it will come' to the notion of fear of being rushed to the awareness of Jim's death we are immersed in questions of mortality from the very outset of this book.  What do you think of Isherwood's addressing this topic so early in the book?  Is it heavy handed or morose - or do you feel that he is skillful enough as an author to make even fears that we would normally approach fiction to escape interesting?  Did the early introduction of issues of mortality put you off or did you find it compelling (or did it have another effect on you entirely)?
3.)  George and Jim fell in love with the house George now lives in the first time they saw it.  They loved it because you could only get to it by the bridge across the creek.  George refers to it as 'our own little island.'  Do you think that George and Jim were attempting to isolate themselves here?  If so who or what are they trying to isolate themselves from?  Does this relate to their being a different couple in the neighborhood?  Do you think the house still fits George or has it become something different without Jim - perhaps a prison?
4.)  What do you make of George's relationship with the children in the neighborhood?  Do you think he seriously dislikes or is irritated by the children?  Is his reaction to the children due to his being alone now?  Do you think that his reactions to the children have further isolated him in the neighborhood - set him apart from his neighbors with children?

Hi, everybody!

I'm just back from some days holidays and I had the time to read Christopher and His Kind, which I liked. I suppose it sheds more ligth on the Berlin Stories, or in general about Isherwood, than on ASM, but I'm glad I've finally read it.

I'm new here, so I don't know the etiquette. To quote the questions or not? Anyway I'd like to say something about the first 4 questions, because to tackle all of them together is too much for me.

1)
The opening of the novel is absolutely awesome. I find the novel a masterpiece, and inside the novel the opening is another masterpiece. The description of the passage from the sleeping body (that which has awoken) to a person, George, the main character, is unique. I also loved the bit with the many faces within its face...like fossils, dead. Look at us-we have died-waht is there to be afraid of? IMO here there is also an echo of a Hinduist spirituality with an eternal cycle of life and death (and reincarnation).
(by the way: has someone read A Spiritual Bloomsbury: Hinduism and Homosexuality in the Lives and Writings of Edward Carpenter, E.M. Forster, and Christopher Isherwood by Antony Copley?).


2)
The early introduction of issues of mortality is absolutely coherent with the whole book. There is a meditation on life from a 58 years old man, noticing that he and his body are getting older (and Isherwood did fight the physical manifestations of age), but the man is also mourning his dead lover. I find the emerging of the issue not too ''heavy'' at all, it is well integrated in the whole.


3)
IMO they are trying to isolate themselves.

I think that Isherwood/George sees himself as different on many levels. First of all because of his sexual orientation. He feels part of the homosexual ''tribe'', they are different, and he feels more alike to one of them, no matter how spiteful he might be (he says this about the British customs official who refuses the entry in Great Britain to his German lover starting a series of problems that will finally put him in jail in Germany and definitely separate them after a relationship lasting 5 years) then to someone of the ''others'', no matter how ''good''. Sorry I'm not quoting literally, but the idea in Christopher and His Kind is this one.

Another reason to stay apart from the other is the critic to the american way of life which will emerge strongly later on in the novel. No one of his neighbours would share his views.

And I suppose the fact of having lived there for not so long makes automatically of them ''the new ones''.

There is no reason why George shouldn't stay in the house. If you loose a beloved person, thoughts about that person are bound to emerge suddenly from a word you hear, a smell, a taste, something you remember. The fact that at the bottom of the stairs George knows each morning that Jim is dead is just one of this episodes. If he would move, other episodes would occur.


4)
I do not think that George seriously dislikes the children, if not he wouldn't feel humiliated and sick at his stomach each time he loses his tempers with them (page 21). I suppose Isherwood also likes to outrage with the cynical description at page 19 (which I enjoyed): ... breeding and bohemianism do not mix... So the tots appeared, litter after litter. And I never thought about the black silhouettes on the yellow ''Children at play'' signs: they are in fact a bit sinister 


That's it for the moment. I'll try to come back later in the week with my contribution, but for sure I'll read what others have to say. Lot of interesting observations till now!

Thanks to Michael for the questions!

Ciao

Antonella

[michaelflanagansf]

I have a question that I'd like to throw out which relates to the passage about Mrs. Strunk hoping George will get the sagging bridge fixed before one of the children gets hurt.  This passage, the 11th "mini-section," is at the top of page 32 in the latest edition.  It begins with the words, "Twenty minutes later, Mrs. Strunk, out on her porch, watering the hibiscus bushes..." and ends, "...Poor man, she thinks, living there all alone.  He has a kind face."

Question:  The rest of the book so far as been from the point of view of George or "it."  This little section seems to be from Mrs. Strunk's POV.  Do other readers here agree that those are really Mrs. Strunk's thoughts, or do you feel that this is just what George, from his own POV, imagines Mrs. Strunk to be thinking of him?

VERY good question, Debbie.  Particularly since the book is SO tied into George's perceptions and being and tracks him through a day.  I will give this thought and post in later in the day (when I'm home from work)

And welcome Nikki and Antonella!  Lovely to see you both here!

[Nikki]

4.)  What do you make of George's relationship with the children in the neighborhood?  Do you think he seriously dislikes or is irritated by the children?  Is his reaction to the children due to his being alone now?  Do you think that his reactions to the children have further isolated him in the neighborhood - set him apart from his neighbors with children?

In his grief, after Jim's death, George has no time for children.  They certainly irritate him with their noise and children's' play, and George's increasing violence toward them - playing the Monster -- is an indication of their effect on him even though he "is ashamed of his roarings because they aren't playacting.   Indeed, he feels "sick to his stomach" after one of the episodes.  These actions have set him apart from his neighbors especially now that he is alone -- the children know it and react to him. George recalls that "Jim always got along with them," but apparently George never did, and he certainly doesn't now.  Children have a way of homing in on what is different or what they perceive to be strange and different, and Mrs. Strunk's lack of control of Benny ("he beats on the door with a hammer") seems to give the children tacit approval to play their irritating games.