Like
other Munro stories, this story opens with an introit about an incident that
does not seem plot related to the story, but might be thematically related. It
takes place at some time in the past when the central character Meriel was a
young woman and is putting on white summer gloves; she smiles because she
remembers something that Queen Sirikit of Thailand was quoted as saying in a
magazine—a quote within a quote from the Parisian fashion designer Balmain who
told her "Always wear white gloves. It's best."
Meriel
is smiling because the advice "It's best" seems a "soft
whisper" of advice, a bit of "absurd and final wisdom." When
Pierre asks her why she is smiling, she tells him, and he says, "Who is
Balmain?" Since the story is entitled "What is Remembered," this
introit is about a memory within a memory, just as the quote is within a quote.
It prepares us for a story about the nature of memory.
We
then shift to some time after the introit incident, when Meriel and her husband
Pierre are getting ready to go to a funeral of Pierre's best friend Jonas, who
is 29, Pierre's age. They have been friends since childhood; Pierre was a
Classics student, got married, got a job, had children, while Jonas was in
engineering, but never married or settled down with a steady job. When he comes
to visit he likes to talk about the past and becomes irritated when the conversation turns to the present. This
prepares us for a story that is about the past dominating the present.
When
Meriel tells Pierre about Jonas' death, he automatically thinks it was suicide,
but is evasive when she wants to know why he thinks this. "She felt his
evasion to be some sort of warning or even a rebuke. As if he suspected her of
deriving from this death—or from their proximity to this death—a feeling that
was discreditable and self-centered. A
morbid, preening excitement." (It is not clear what significance this
reference to death has, except for the fact that it suggests that one can make
use of the death of another for his or her own personal reasons. The uses of death might be related to the
uses of the past.
We
now have a long paragraph about husbands in those days who had changed to
suitors "desperate in their sexual agonies" and then once married
changed to resolute and disapproving men, off to work every morning, days spent
in unknown labors. While the men had a
lot to learn, the women could slip back into a kind of "second adolescence"
in a "throwback to high school." (This suggests that the story may be
about a woman's use of the past in particular)
At
the funeral service, the minister compares Jonas's life to a baby in the womb.
"If the baby could somehow be informed of what would happen to it in the
near future, would it not be incredulous, as well as afraid? And so are we, most of the time, but we
should not be, for we have been given assurance….The baby is lapped in its
ignorance." (The funeral sermon echoes the theme the story seems to be
emphasizing—being caught in time in which we cannot know the future and seem
dissociated from the past, thus lapped in ignorance.)
She
watches Pierre at the reception after the funeral and pretends she is seeing
him for the first time. She remembers a teacher's party a year or so earlier
when she came up to him and talked to him as if he was a stranger and she were discreetly
flirting with him. (This notion of pretending to be strangers suggests the
sexual charge that climaxes (pun intentional) the story, for Meriel and the man
she has sex with pretend to be husband and wife, which gives their encounter an
additional sexual charge)
Meriel
wants to go and visit an old woman her mother had admired, named Muriel, called
Aunt Muriel, although not blood related. Mariel is named for her. (This is an example of a common Munro
technique of doubling; it is a folktale motif).
The bush doctor, Doctor Asher, who had been looking after Jonas, has
flown down to the funeral and offers to drive Meriel to visit her mother's old
friend. Although their conversation is polite and formal on the drive, when
they arrive he offers to come in and wait for her, and his offering of his time
and presence seems to have little to do with courtesy and something to do with
her.
When
they go in, Meriel seems changed by her knowledge of the doctor's interest.
"Something had happened to her. She
had a sudden mysterious sense of power and delight, as if with every step she
took, a bright message was travelling from her heels to the top of her skull."
When she asks him later why he wanted to come in with her, he says,
"Because I didn't want to lose sight of you."
Aunt
Muriel is of Meriel's grandmother's generation; she was her mother's art
teacher. She knows Meriel and the doctor are not married—can tell the
difference. When the old woman says she knows he is there with Meriel, he asks
how she could tell that. She answers,
"I used to be a devil myself."
Mariel
feels there is some betrayal of the past stirring in the old woman. "Some
degradation was in the offing. Meriel
was upset by this, remotely excited." The old woman tells of her youth
when she was a devil, and she and her friends had adventures, but all according
to a script, engaging in rituals. She tells stories that hint of sexual
encounters; once she was blindfolded, but says she knew who it was, for she
knew all of them there. Meriel is "Distracted,
play-acting, and with a vague sense of shame." The doctor and Meriel give
each other a stealthy, almost married glance, "its masquerade and its
bland intimacy arousing to those who were after all not married."
When
they leave, in a gesture of intimacy, he reaches over and picks at the cloth of
her dress which has tuck to her damp skin while setting. (There are a number of
references in this section of the story to playacting, following a script,
engaging in a ritual, pretending—and all of it has to do with sex and
storytelling. The idea of masquerade and
playing a role is a common one in folktale and fairytale. When it is in regard
to sex, as it often is, it seems to suggest the magic of Carnival, or stepping
outside of one's everyday world and engaging in a fantasy world, a kind of
alternate reality. The old woman's
recollection of the past sexual encounters adds to Meriel's sense of sexual
excitement.
In
the car, "She was holding in a wail of disappointment, a clamor of desire." They speak like "caricatures." Until, "unable to put up with this any
more," she says, "take me somewhere else."
We
now shift to the present as Meriel recalls this moment. She believes that the phrase "Take me
somewhere else" rather than "Let's go somewhere else" is
important. "The risk, the transfer
of power. Complete risk and transfer. Let's
go—that would have the risk, but not the abdication, which is the start for
her—in all her reliving of this moment—of the erotic slide." (This is a key phrase—the "erotic slide"
exists in the story, in "what is remembered," not necessarily in the
moment. But of course the moment is now
always in the past, is always what is remembered, and thus in the control of
the one remembering, being used by the one remembering for her own purposes,
and always being amended and altered and added to.)
When
Meriel thinks back on their going to an apartment where the doctor has been
staying, she thinks she would have preferred another scene, and she substitutes
one she prefers in her memory—a hotel in West Vancouver. "There she would
have to cross the little lobby with head bowed and arms clinging to her sides,
her whole body permeated with exquisite shame.
And he would speak to the desk clerk in a low voice that did not
advertise, but did not conceal or apologize for their purpose." She creates
a new scene using the "she would, he would" tense-- what might happen
but did not except in what is remembered.
"Why
did she conjure up , why did she add that scene? It was for the moment of exposure, the
piercing sense of shame and pride that took over her body as she walked through
the pretend lobby, and for the sound of his voice, its discretion and authority
speaking to the clerk the words that she should not quite make out."
(This combination of shame and pride
that the invented scene in the hotel would have created in her seems
important.)
"The
job she had to do, as she saw it, was to remember everything—and by remember,
she meant experience it in her mind, one more time—then store it away
forever. This day's experience set in
order, none of it left ragged or lying about, all of it gathered in like
treasure and finished with, set aside."
(This is the most explicit reference to "The key to the Treasure is
the Treasure." For her, the experience takes on significance if she can
set it all in order, making use of all the details and creating details when
necessary, making a treasure in the mind of the experience. The key to this treasure is the process of
making it in the mind and making use of it.)
The
final part of the story projects Meriel more than thirty years later, after
Pierre has died. She recalls reading to
him during his illness. One book was
Turgenev's Fathers and Sons, and they
have a discussion about the scene when Bazarov declares his love for Anna
Sergeyevna. Meriel wanted the scene to
do differently She thinks Anna would not
have reacted as she did, that it is just Turgenev yanking them apart for
reasons of his own. She thinks they should have had the sexual encounter that
Bazarov wants and Anna demurs from. Pierre says that Meriel's view is romantic.
"You're wrenching things around to make a happy ending."
When
Pierre argues that if Anna gave in, it would be because she loved him and when
the sex was over she would still love him, for that is what women are like when
they are in love, but Bazarov would leave in the morning because it is his
nature; he hates loving her. When Pierre asks how would that be better, Meriel repels,
"They'd have something. Their
experience." (This, of course, is a reference to her experience with the
doctor—that although nothing "actually" ever came of it, "what
is remembered" is the treasure that remains.
Now
we shift back to the past when Meriel goes home on the ferry. "What she
had to go through was wave after wave of intense recollection. And this was what she would continue to go through—at
gradually lengthening intervals—for years to come. She would keep picking up things she'd
missed, and these would still jolt her." (And thus, the power of the
encounter lies in the mind of the one remembering, and the reality of it is in
the memory).
"She
remembered his hazel-gray eyes, the close-up view of his coarse skin, a circle
like an old scar beside his nose, the slick breadth of his chest as he reared
up from her." "Sudden recollection of even their early, unsure, and
tentative moments could still make her fold in on herself, as if to protect the
raw surprise of her own body, the racketing of desire. My love—my love, she would mutter in a harsh, mechanical way, the
words a secret poultice." (This suggests the use of the memory—what Eliot
calls the fragments one shores up against one's ruin).
She
sees the doctor's picture in the paper after his death in an air crash. "The
fact that he was dead did not seem to have much effect on her daydreams—if that
was what you could call them. The ones
in which she imagined chance meetings or even desperately arranged reunions,
had never had a foothold on reality, in any case, and were not revised because
he was dead. They had to wear themselves
out in a way she did not control and never understood." (Meriel
"works" with the memory, creating possibilities that exist only in
the mind—what makes the memory so powerful and important is precisely that it
is a memory—that it is something one can work with creatively.)
When
she was on the ferry that night, she watched the wake of the boat and the
thought occurs to her "that in a certain kind of story—not the kind that
anyone wrote anymore—the thing for her to do would be to throw herself into the
water. Just as she was, packed full of
happiness, rewarded as she would surely never be again, every cell in her body
pumped up with a swe4et self-esteem. A romantic act that could be seen—from a
forbidden angle—as supremely rational." (This is the central romantic
notion—one that Heathcliff would understand, that Anna Karenina would
understand, that Gatsby would understand.)
After
Pierre's death, she recalls one further detail—that when he takes her to the
ferry, she starts to kiss him and he says, "No, I never do." She understands this to be a kind of
cautioning. "Information that could not make her happy, though it might be
intended to keep her from making a serious mistake. To save her from false
hopes and humiliation of a certain kind of mistake." She doesn't doubt
this recollection is true. "She did not see how she could have suppressed
it so successfully for all this time.
She had an idea that if she had not been able to do that, her life might
have bene different." (This act of
refusing to consummate the encounter with a goodbye kiss is important, for it
forces her to give up any idea of sustaining the relationship except as an
idea, a dream, a fantasy, a manipulation of the past into a story.)
Meriel
thinks she might not have stayed with Pierre. She thinks that trying to match what
had been said at the ferry with what had been done earlier would "have made
her more alert and more curious. Pride
or contrariness might have played a part—a need to have some man eat those
words, as refusal to learn her lesson—but that wouldn't have been all. There was another sort of life she could have
had—which was not to say she would have preferred it. It was probably because of her age and because
of the thin cool air she breathed since Pierre's death, that she could think of
that other sort of life simply as a kind of research which had its own pitfalls
and achievements." She thinks that prudence, some economical sort of
emotional management had been her guiding light all along.
She
thinks of the "self-preserving moment" the doctor made, the kind and
deadly caution, the attitude of inflexibility that had grown a bit stale with him,
like an outmoded swagger. She could view him now with an everyday
mystification, as if he had been a husband.
She wondered if he'd stay that way, or if she had some new role waiting
for him, some use still to put him to in her mind, during the time ahead."
What
is the purpose of people and the past?
For the writer, the past is for transformation into story. And for the
writer, people exist to transform into characters in stories. I have one more Munro story from the volume Hateship, Friendship, Courtship, Loveship,
Marriage to "read" in preparation for my essay--"Family
Furnishings"-- the central story in the collection about using
people and the past to create stories. I hope by this time next week to have
enough material to write that essay.
4 comments:
Dear Charles May -- Thank you for your wonderful posts. Alice Munro is my favorite female short story writer. William Trevor is my favorite male short story writer. My husband put me on to the WSJ book club covering Alice Munro's work. Yours was the best post and it led me to your blog. What a lot of effort! I've read Hateship, Friendship...several times and I've listened to it on cd, but you have given me new things to think about. I write fiction and have had several stories published. While my vision is much different than Ms. Munro's, I admire her details immensely. What an incredible talent! I hope she hasn't really retired.
Sincerely, Kathleen Glassburn
www.kathleenglassburn.com
Thank you, Kathleen, for your kind comments about my blog. I too hope Ms. Munro has not retired completely from writing, but I suspect she has. I just finished rereading "Family Furnishings" and better understand her recent remark that she wanted to quite writing so she could lead a "normal" life.
Thanks for your response. I have many Alice Munro stories that I have not read yet, so they should keep me busy for a good long while. And, I will continue to read your blog. I read Steve Almond's article and appreciated his viewpoint. I got an MFA in December of 2001 -- an interesting/horrific time to be completing this degree. I love Best American Short Stories and have been reading them, analyzying them, since 1993. My new copy is on order. His remarks about a "curious arrogance toward published authors" hit home. I remember that few of the other students in my program seemed as enamored with this collection as I happened to be. Maybe a "kind of quiet panic" accounted for some of the attitudes I witnessed. And, how true -- Almond's remark about "thousands of doubt-choked hours working to improve and absorb tons of rejection..." I've written all my life and have been sending work out for about the last ten years -- never satisfied with any of my efforts, but feeling like I've failed myself if I don't try. I hope Dorothy, in another comment, will continue to send her work out. Most of my hundreds of rejections have been form letters, an occasional kind, encouraging remark, only one really upsetting comment comes to mind. As managing editor of an on-line publication, I read and reject so many submissions. At first, this was really hard. Now, I consider this to be part of the process -- we all have to go through it.
Great read tthank you
Post a Comment