(This is a re-upload!)
I do not pretend to have read all of McEwan's novels (though his novel, Saturday, is next on my reading list on my sister's recommendation).
Having already read Atonement, I was pleasantly surprised by the stark contrast in tone of McEwan's The Child In Time. The novel tells the story of Stephen Lewis, who, whilst out with his daughter one morning, lost her. I was originally apprehensive about being overwhelmed by Stephen's grief, but I appreciated the restraint in the sadness that enabled me to read through his pain. What I found interesting about Stephen's retelling of that morning, is the nature of Kate's disappearance is left unknown to the reader. There is something chilling about not knowing the circumstances of a child's disappearance that I felt justified Stephen and his wife, Julia's, inability to move past Kate's disappearance. For me, this retelling put into perspective the idea that certain events have such an impact on a person that so many years on, it still feels like it happened only yesterday. The unfurling of Stephen's horror and pain is slow and measured in such a way that I forgot that I was reading Kate's disappearance as an event that had already taken place.
The way Stephen and Julia grieve over the loss of their daughter is an interesting aspect of the novel. I loved the way Stephen was presented in a state of numb existence, one that to those around him, makes him appear as though he is no longer grieving his loss. But I think the flashback to Kate's disappearance, highlights the effect his loss has had on him because he is a mere shadow of the man he once was. In contrast, I found Julia reflected the anguish the loss of a child brings and the crippling effect it can have on a parent. I thought their marriage also reflected the different ways they experienced their pain. The unspoken grief they are both still experiencing projects out and corrupts their marriage until both Stephen and Julia are left with nothing but pain. I liked that McEwan added this dimension to the novel because I understood more about the novel in the end when their marriage is able to begin again.
The character of Charles Darke was, for me, the most endearing character in the novel. His childlike nature made me warm to his reasoning for reverting back into a state of childhood, despite his potential for having a successful writing or political career. To some, Charles would seem like a character who is throwing his life away in order to live in a past he was never given the chance to live in the first place. But, to me, Charles is the strongest character of them all in the way he chooses to not get stuck living a life he does not want. He chooses to live life his way and I found myself respecting that about him.
This brings me to the idea of the relativity of time, and Charles choosing to live his adult life as a child reinforced this notion to me. I admit, I had some difficulty understanding this at first, however. Perhaps the most confusing aspect of the novel is Stephen's inadvertant jump through time when he appears in a past that is both his own, and yet, not. When Stephen appears to his pregnant mother through the window of the pub she is sitting in with his father. We find out that Stephen is yet to be born and has accidently saved his own life by appearing to his mother who decides to keep her unborn child. With the exception of Charles's wife, Thelma (who is fascinated with time), this scene is, perhaps, the most obvious instance of the fluidity of time. In this scene, for me, Stephen represented the "Child" in The Child In Time. He is Stephen the father, Stephen the husband, but at the same time he is the child who almost never came to be.
I, at first, questioned McEwan's ending the novel the way he did. I thought the birth of a new child for Stephen and Julia was a little too perfect an ending for my liking. (A 'happily-ever-after' ending did not seem a fitting end, but the sex of the child Julia gives birth to is not revealed and I realised that replacing Kate in order to repair the Lewis's marriage was not the intention). When I read the scene a second time, I realised that what used to be withdrawn, and awkward exchanges, full of things unsaid, between Stephen and Julia, transformed back into a partnership. I realised then, that through the way McEwan slowly listed the sadness throughout the novel, gave new weight to the saying that, "time heals all wounds." I found that there came a point where the pain was not so crippling for Stephen and Julia. That the pain was not so crippling anymore and nothing had changed but time. I found such a powerful lesson in this novel about loss, love, pain, and the flexibility of time.
It may sound a little strange considering the subject matter, but I found the novel to be unexpectedly uplifting. I must say, I cannot recall ever experiencing a book that has had such a profound impact on me. Admittedly, I found it difficult to read this novel at times, but I am glad that I did because of how much I learned from it. A serious, but very good read!
No comments:
Post a Comment