Memory dislikes motion, preferring to hold things still

I am always amazed by how much an author can fit into one small book.  How many ideas or images or feelings.  John Banville's The Sea deserves a second reading.  I am very ambivalent about this book, however.  Truthfully I did not like the narrator, Max Morden.  As the story went on I even began to dislike him more.   Did the ending redeem him in my mind?  I guess it made him more human at least.  There were a couple of twists at the end, which I am not entirely sure what to make of.  This book is beautifully written though, and for that reason I would like to reread it.  Not the least for all the references he makes to the artist Bonnard.  Apparently there were also references to Shakespeare, Proust and a few other artists as well, which I either missed or just read over without making much note of.

This happens to be one of the 1001 books included in 1001 Books You Must Read Before You Die.  I like what the editor had to say about it in the brief essay about the book:

"Banville's prose often has something of the miraculous to it, and the miracle here is its capacity to use words to produce images, to find beneath the constant movement of the everyday, an attitude, or glance, or shape that seems suddenly, magically present.  The novel depicts the ugliness of death and of bodily decrepitude, as it conjures the experience of loss with an uncanny intensity.  But if this novel is about death and the steady humiliation of dying, it is more than anything about the power of memory, and of art, to catch at something that doesn't die, something as immune to death as innocence."

Banville manages to seamlessly venture from the past to the present.  While he does use a lot of words that I was unfamiliar with, the prose didn't feel choppy.  This is my first experience reading Banville.  I am not sure if this is typical of his work or not.  Do authors write like this consciously--to set themselves apart from the reader, or it is just normal?  I am not a writer, so I am not sure how much just comes naturally and how much is written with the desire to (sorry, for lack of a better way of saying it) show off.  Of course some of this is just my perception as a reader and what I am bringing to the book.  Perhaps a second read will clarify what I feel.  I am not really giving you a very good review, but so much as been written about it, I don't feel I can say anything new and enlightening.  It is a thoughtful book, though, and I do recommend it. 

Comments

[litlove]

I liked it, up until the point where I got a bit fed up with it and I have to admit that I didn't exactly finish the end so much as skim it. I'd never read any other Banville novel, but I did enjoy his beautiful prose. However, much as I seem to be carping on about plot endlessly, I did miss a real sense of something important building up out of the story, something, oh I don't know, greater than the sum of the story's parts. The quote from 1001 books IS very helpful and seems to indicate that I was missing something when I read this - perhaps I should go back to it too.

[Danielle]

I think I personally prefer slightly more plot driven novels, and maybe this is why I feel so if-y about this one? Why do you think Chloe and Myles did what they did? I just didn't get that. And I didn't clue in on Miss Vavasour. That all just seemed to come out of the blue--like it was tacked on for it to finally be meaningful, but I am not sure what the meaning is supposed to be! I guess this is why I feel like I should read it again now that I know what to look for. Of course I have way too many other books to think about now, so I will save a reread for some later time!

[kimbofo]

This is a wonderful post about this book, Danielle. I am a longtime Banville fan and this work is quite typical of his previous novels, although it seems slightly more polished and less macbre. He uses words like artists use paint: to add colour, depth and dimension. I read this book hot on the heels of Joyce's 'Portrait of an Artist' and realised the similarities in their writing - mainly in the inventiveness and use of double-barrelled adjectives. I now know what the term 'Joycean' truly means!

I also find Banville's style quite Irish, by which I mean there is a certain way that contemporary Irish writers form sentences. My other half is Irish and he tells me this is because Irish writers use the same grammatical conventions that apply to the Irish language. So instead of saying things like 'We just went to the pub' they say 'we are just after going to the pub'. Interesting, huh?

[Danielle]

Kimbofo--I have been lucky enough to have been to Ireland a few times, and yes, they do have a very cool way of phrasing things (sooo wish I could go back to visit). I am getting ready to read my first short story by Joyce, so it will be interesting to see how they compare. I wonder if Banville studied art as it seems to be a theme in more than one of his books (at least from the description of them in the back of The Sea).

[Dorothy W.]

It's always hard -- if not impossible -- to figure out why an author does what he/she does. I'd suspect that Banville's not trying to set himself apart from the reader but somehow the language he's using is necessary to the point or the feeling or the ideas he trying to get across. I haven't read it, though, so probably I should keep quiet!

[Danielle]

Dorothy--This could just very well be his style, and since I haven't read his other work I am not sure, but I bet it is. It isn't his fault that I don't know all the words! :) There are weird things going on in my life and I think it is having an effect on my reading as the last few books I have finished I have felt really ambivalent about.

[Kate S.]

I wasn't keen on Max either, but I loved "The Sea." It made my list of top ten reads of last year. Here's the review that I posted right after I first read it:
http://katesbookblog.blogspot.com/2005/12/banvilles-sea-of-words.html

On the question of language, I think it's important to keep in mind that the novel is narrated in the first person. To the extent that there's an element of showing off in the use of language, it's Max showing off, not Banville. I think that Banville simply has an extraordinary grasp of language and an extraordinary volcabulary and he uses these tools to full advantage in his work. Max, on the other hand, may well be using language in a manner calculated to set himself apart from the common man at various points. That seems to me to be in keeping with his character.

[Victoria]

I think Kate has hit the "style" question on the head: Max is often a pretentious academic of the first order and "The Sea" is the memoir he's writing instead of his art historical magnun opus. The narration is self-inflating...in some ways it makes a mockery of him and his way of seeing things, in others its very beautiful. I thought that Max's "voice" was the most interesting thing in the novel - he's untrustworthy, mis-remembering and re-imagining events, shaping people up into what he wants them to be. I didn't really understand what happened at the end either, emotionally speaking. But then that seems fitting, given that Max doesn't understand it either or only understands it imperfectly. Since he's our conduit we are limited in what we can see. :-) If that makes sense...

[Marg]

After reading your review, I went back to read what I wrote. Whilst I didn't love this book because of the slow moving nature, and the fact that I didn't really like the main character, he does paint amazing word pictures.

[Danielle]

Dorothy, Kate, and Victoria--thanks for the comments. It does make sense when you frame it that way. It isn't Banville trying to be witty, so much as Max is simply very self-inflating as you say Victoria. It was pointed out that he came from a poorer family, and he did sort of drag himself out. It all works in this context. I still don't like Max, but I can appreciate the story more. And the writing really was beautiful. This is definitely the sort of book that makes you stop and think. Eventually I would like to be able to "get it" when I read a book like this...
Marg--Yes, it did move slow didn't it. Not really much happened until the end. It is good to be challenged sometimes in reading.

[Lesley]

I keep meaning to read this one, but by all accounts, I'll need to have a dictionary nearby when I do.