After reading Jeffrey Eugenides’s “The Marriage Plot” and staggering along the pathway of self-discovery in mix-matched shoes (a Leonard Bankhead left-footed loafer and a Mitchell Grammaticus right-footed sandal) I find myself questioning the journey.
I like Leonard’s mysterious approach in his quest for
companionship, after all, he gets the girl, he marries Madeleine Hannah, and as
crazy as he is (been portrayed that way myself), his manic depression, his
mental illness is what draws Madeleine to him! At least in the beginning.
But where’s the sustenance?
Here’s the type of marriage they had (p.170):
There was something pleasing about having her big Saint Bernard all to herself. He didn’t want to go out even to a movie anymore. Now he was interested only in his doggy bed, his doggy bowl, and his mistress. He laid his head on her lap, wanting to be petted…
This type of relationship is all too familiar, been there, done that, one gumby too many; where’s the saltwater taffy? The sweetness of life?
Then there’s Mitchell—“the nice guy” (no bad boy image here; been told on several occasions by the opposite sex, “JR, you’re a really nice guy”)—yet this here Mitchell’s undying faith in pursuing Madeleine troubles me more so than Leonard’s disappearance into the woods. During their college years Mitchell checks Madeleine about their social disconnect (p.19):
“… we’re friends when you want to be friends, and we’re never more than friends because you don’t want to be. And I have to go along with that.”
“I’m sorry,” Madeleine said, feeling put upon and blindsided. “I just don’t like you that way.”
“Exactly!” Mitchell
cried. “You’re not attracted to me physically. O.K., fine. But who says I was
ever attracted to you mentally?”
And get this, here we go again, here’s Madeleine’s wish for her and Mitchell (p.183):
Apparently, she wanted to keep Mitchell for herself, even while denying him. There was no end to her selfishness.
So I’m left wondering: Where do I fit on the Leonard-Mitchell spectrum in my pursuit of companionship? What makes a relationship ignite? What keeps the fire burning? How much is physical? How much is mental? One thing is for certain: I need to keep moving forward regardless of the footwear only to stop for an errant pebble in my shoe. And no more dog houses either! I’ll find the right Madeleine—just not this type—and I’ll find her in due time.
With that said I definitely recommend “The Marriage Plot” and will probably reference it again along my journey to self-discovery.
11 comments:
Good luck with finding your "Madeleine". In any relationships someone does end up in the "dog house". It just makes it more "fun" to make up!!!!!
Wow. Does Jeffrey Eugenides’ “The Marriage Plot" strike a chord in me, and apparently, you.
It was a secondary character in the book that caught my attention. I especially appreciate the bit about Mitchell:
Then there’s Mitchell—“the nice guy” (no bad boy image here; been told on several occasions by the opposite sex, “JR, you’re a really nice guy”)—yet this here Mitchell’s undying faith in pursuing Madeleine troubles me more so than Leonard’s disappearance into the woods. During their college years Mitchell checks Madeleine about their social disconnect (p.19):
“… we’re friends when you want to be friends, and we’re never more than friends because you don’t want to be. And I have to go along with that.”
Well, I am hardly Jeffrey Eugenides, one of the great American novelists of the contemporary era, but darn, this brings me up to my own
novel about a guy in a "Mitchell" situation.
That situation was so well analyzed, on many levels, by the excellent Mona Rahman,of India, who did a review of my "The Fire in Bradford." issued this year.
"The relationship is polio- struck right from the start - no sooner than it starts to rise up to stand on its feet, it crumbles and falls each time. The sentiments of the primal passions are expressed by Prokopchuk , not by eliminating their grotesque vulgarity, but by using it to express things that are neither grotesque nor vulgar ; but are vast and elemental.
I wanna read Jeffrey Eugenides!
I can't match the talent, but my own reviewer, Mona, seems to suggest that we might at least be, both forever Jung,even if sexually complicated.
...A tip for you, Jim: Try not to get yourself in a rebound situation with a woman so unsure of her own sexuality that she'll screw you up too.
Hell, I had to write a novel to refract the Medusa glance of my crazy 'rebound' , and I'm not sure if my asbestos suit had been on tight enough. Sure ended up getting burned.
But maybe the book was the thing.
I had inadvertently opened (and broke off?) the fourth corner of a triangle-- not just the complication of me and my "rebound" gal and her still -present husband -- but another poor fuckup in the plot who was also invisibly courting my rebound gal!
Ah, seems we live and don't learn.
Or do we?
Thanks for the advice Ivan. There's a whole lot of self-reflection going on inside my noggin'. I've been meaning to read "The Fire in Bradford" and since I've got more alone time on my hands then I know what to do with, I just might get to it. You sure had me chuckling - "asbestos suit" & "getting burned." You're the same old Ivan. As for Mona, I'll have to check back with her to see how she's doing. I still can't believe that she sent "Shantaram" to me, all the way from India; excellent novel.
Could just be a play of light but it looks like someone in red wants to be your pal. Whose grave stone are you standing in front of?
Hucks gang is curious. May need to revisit.
Enjoyed the self analysis. Great writing. Huck
I'm so glad to be away from the chase myself right now. I hope I never have to do it again. Far too much work for far too little reward. At least most of the time.
That's some real self analysis. Enjoyed the read. Know that 2012 will be your year of personal growth. Experience it all. MW
J.R.-Just thanks for the review. Just finishe reading 'The Virgin Suicides' by Jeffery Eugenides. 'Marriage Plot' is up real soon! C U in 2012, dear bud.
Mona is back!
At least in my blog space
She will be starting a new blog of her own soon.
JR, I dig it -- thanks for the "double take" on characters, fiction and quandary.
I'd say, play the field, relax, enjoy -- if possible. And reverse the polarity: if someone is too clueless to dig you on your terms, then, 'next.'
"Double your money make a stack. I'm on to the
next one." Jay-Z
Take your time, friend. Take it from someone who's been around awhile- be the man you want to become and you'll find her. And Happy New Year,by the way!
Post a Comment