Tea or Books? #89: Do we care about gardens?, and Gilead vs Home

Marilynne Robinson and gardens – welcome to episode 89!

We are scraping the barrel a little in our first half, and arguably repeating ourselves, but please enjoy our musings on gardens. In the second half, after answering a question from Jen, we talk about Marilynne Robinson’s novels Gilead and Home. Finally, after talking about it for years!

You can listen above, at Spotify, at Apple Podcast, or via any podcast app you use. Reviews and ratings very welcome – they apparently help people find us. If you have any questions or suggestions, do get in touch at teaorbooks@gmail.com. And you can support the podcast at Patreon. What a lot of options!

The books and authors we mention in this episode are:

84 Charing Cross Road by Helene Hanff
Random Commentary by Dorothy Whipple
The New Magdalen by Wilkie Collins
O, The Brave Music by Dorothy Evelyn Smith
Expiation by Elizabeth von Arnim
Father by Elizabeth von Arnim
Lolly Willowes by Sylvia Townsend Warner
The Hours by Michael Cunningham
The Snow Queen by Michael Cunningham
Flesh and Blood by Michael Cunningham
Letters of Tove Jansson
Dear Mrs Bird by AJ Pearce
A Jane Austen Education by William Deresiewicz
Dear Reader by Cathy Rentzenbrink
On Reading Well by Karen Swallow Prior
Faces of Justice by Sybille Bedford
Not at Home by Doris Langley Moore
The Secret Garden by Frances Hodgson Burnett
Tom’s Midnight Garden by Philippa Pearce
Down the Garden Path by Beverley Nichols
Merry Hall by Beverley Nichols
Dear Friend and Gardener by Beth Chatto and Christopher Lloyd
A.A. Milne
A Thatched Roof by Beverley Nichols
Elizabeth and Her German Garden by Elizabeth von Arnim
The Solitary Summer by Elizabeth von Arnim
Mansfield Park by Jane Austen
Virginia Woolf’s Garden by Caroline Zoob
The Poisoned Chocolates Case by Anthony Berkley
Murder Underground by Mavis Doriel Hay
Death on the Cherwell by Mavis Doriel Hay
A Scream in Soho by John Brandon
The Lake District Murder by John Bude
Agatha Christie
Quick Curtain by Alan Melville
Death of Anton by Alan Melville
The Secret of High Eldersham by Miles Burton
Mystery in White by J Jefferson Farjeon
Gilead by Marilynne Robinson
Home by Marilynne Robinson
Lila by Marilynne Robinson
Jack by Marilynne Robinson
O, The Brave Music by Dorothy Evelyn Smith
Miss Plum and Miss Penny by Dorothy Evelyn Smith

Jack by Marilynne Robinson

The publication of a new novel by Marilynne Robinson is always an event. She is one of the few authors whose output I eagerly await, and I had Jack preordered – it arrived a couple of weeks before the official publication date, and I couldn’t resist jumping right in. It’s the fourth of the Gilead series, though technically you can read them in any order. Chronologically, it comes before Home.

Jack is the first of the series not to take place at all in the town of Gilead, though it certainly haunts the entire novel. Jack is the wayward son of Reverend Robert Boughton, one of several sons and daughters but the only one who turned away from the family completely. As this novel opens, we see him living in a small town far away, occasionally visited by his kindly brother Teddy, but more often collecting the money that Teddy leaves for him at a previous address. He is too proud and damaged to return home, even for his mother’s funeral. But he is also hopeful of improvement – of his fortunes improving, of improving himself, of finding someone who believes he is worth the effort. But he also reviles those opportunities. Jack is in a constant war with himself. We see him in Gilead as the casually cruel neighbour’s son of John Ames’s memory; in Home as the prodigal son who has been quietened by life, but cannot help resisting a reunion. In Jack, we see the man between those stages.

After a few pages, showing Jack and a young African-American woman called Della, whom he has offended in a manner that isn’t immediately clear, the scene shifts to a cemetery – and then we enter an extraordinary section of the novel. Jack and Della are both spending the night locked in there. This is habitual for Jack, and an accident for Della. For dozens of pages, Robinson shows us their conversation in real time. It reminded me a lot of Before Sunrise and Before Sunset, which are among my favourite films. They talk about nothing and everything, revealing as much in their silences as their replies. Neither opens their hearts – both have difficulties with trust.

She took a deep breath. ”I’m not going to get into this with you, Mr Boughton.”

Why did he persist? She was reconsidering, taking her purse and her bouquet into her lap. Could that be what he wanted her to do? It wouldn’t be self-defeat, precisely, because at best there would be only these few hours, tense and probationary, and then whatever he might want to rescue from them afterward for the purposes of memory. That other time, when the old offense was fresh, she had seemed to regret it for his sake as much as her own. He had seen kindness weary before. It could still surprise him a little.

He nodded and stood up. ”You’d rather I left you alone. I’ll do that. I’ll be in shouting distance. In case you need me.”

”No,” she said. ”If we could just talk a little.”

”Like two polite strangers who happen to be spending a night in a cemetery.”

”Yes, that’s right.”

”Okay.” So he sat down again. ”Well,” he said, ”what brings you here this evening, Miss Miles?”

”Pure foolishness, That’s all it was.” And she shook her head.

[…]

She said, ”I owe you an apology. I haven’t been polite.”

”True enough,” he said. ”So.”

”So?”

”So, pay up.”

She laughed. ”Please accept my apology.”

”Consider it done. Now,” he said, ”you accept mine.”

She shrugged. ”I don’t really want to do that.”

”Fair’s fair, isn’t it?”

”No, it isn’t, not all the time. Besides, I promised myself I wouldn’t.”

There’s a danger, when one starts quoting Robinson, that one will never stop. In that ‘[…]’, I cut out quite a bit, but I wanted to show how she uses dialogue – that sounds so inconsequential, but builds up the relationship of characters so well. In all her novels, I think she might be best at people disagreeing but never quite coming to the point. Every argument – and Jack and Home are full of conversations that are almost arguments – has two people afraid to speak all they are thinking, awkwardly hovering around truths, trying to work out exactly how much of themselves they can reveal. It’s all so masterly.

Jack is a romance, of sorts – the most cautious and often melancholy romance you can imagine. Because, of course, the barriers here are not just the hurts and mistrusts of Della and Jack, but the fact that they are from different races at a time where a marriage between them would be illegal in many US states and make them likely victims of discrimination in all of them. Interestingly, back home in Iowa there would have been no law against their union. Where Jack and Della now are, their fledgling relationship is illegal. And Della’s family are keen that she is not hurt – as well as believing ideologically that African-Americans should marry African-Americans. Della’s hard life becomes still harder, and Robinson is excellent at showing her gradual, reluctant, and often poorly rewarded affection for Jack – even while Jack and his emotions remain centre stage.

It’s hard to think of many things that Robinson doesn’t do excellently. Perhaps structure is one – or the signposting of structure, at least. The narrative leaps back and forth a bit, particularly around their first date, and it was sometimes a little confusing to remember where we were. But, without the achronology, that scene in the cemetery would have lost its power.

The real star of the book is Robinson’s writing. It’s the sort of novel to read slowly, savouring her impossibly good writing. So often, I would have to pause, having read an observation so perfect, or a trait so strikingly described, that it deserved a moment or two of reflection. Here’s one bit I highlighted:

There were times in his youth when his imagination of destruction were so powerful that the deed itself seemed as bad as done. So he did it. It was as if the force of the idea were strong enough that his collaboration in it was trivial.

Jack has been described as a novel about grace – and ‘grace’ is, indeed, the final word of the book. Robinson is a wise theologian, and certainly the idea of grace is threaded throughout. Jack is a man who cannot believe he deserves anything – and, indeed, the doctrine of grace shows us that good things can be given irrespective of deserving. The gift of Della’s love, the prospective reunion with his family, even the idea of a job and home – these are undeserved gifts of grace that Jack finds difficult to receive. But it is true that to understand all is to forgive all. The Jack we see in earlier Gilead novels becomes, in Jack, so rich and full and deep a portrait that one cannot help but empathise with him, failings and all.

To put it simply, this is an extraordinary and wonderful novel. Even more extraordinary is the fact that Robinson doesn’t revise – she just writes out the novel, first time. What a gift. I hope she never stops adding to the Gilead world. Jack is a strong contender for my favourite of the series – and if she can give this much depth to each character, I can’t see why the small canvas need ever be completely filled.

Tea or Books? #86: Empathy vs Sympathy and The Child That Books Built vs When I Was A Child I Read Books

Marilynne Robinson, Francis Spufford, empathy and sympathy!

Welcome to episode 86, in which we talk about characters we feel empathetic towards and those we feel sympathetic towards. And if you aren’t sure of the distinction, don’t worry, we’ve got that covered too.

In the second half, we compare two books with similar titles but very different contents: When I Was a Child I Read Books by Marilynne Robinson and The Child That Books Built by Francis Spufford.

Do get in touch if you have any suggestions for topics or a question for the middle bit – we’re at teaorbooks[at]gmail.com. Find us in your podcast app of choice, on Spotify, or on Apple Podcasts. And you can support us on Patreon, where there are also bonus ten-minute episodes from me.

The books and authors we mention in this episode are:

The Game by A.S. Byatt
Possession by A.S. Byatt
The Matisse Stories by A.S. Byatt
The Children’s Book by A.S. Byatt
The Vanishing Act by Adrian Alington
Dorothy L Sayers
Agatha Christie
Diary of a Provincial Lady by E.M. Delafield
Mr Norris Changes Trains by Christopher Isherwood
Goodbye To Berlin by Christopher Isherwood
Decline and Fall by Evelyn Waugh
Henry James
Prater Violet by Christopher Isherwood
Sense and Sensibility by Jane Austen
Emma by Jane Austen
Ian McEwan
Gilead by Marilynne Robinson
Dr Thorne by Anthony Trollope
The Warden by Anthony Trollope
Barchester Towers by Anthony Trollope
The Vicar of Wakefield by Oliver Goldsmith
The Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger
Lady Susan by Jane Austen
Ivy Compton-Burnett
I Capture the Castle by Dodie Smith
Biggles series by W.E. Johns
The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald
Alias Grace by Margaret Atwood
Any Human Heart by William Boyd
The Mirror and the Light by Hilary Mantel
The Way We Live Now by Meg Rosoff
My Cousin Rachel by Daphne du Maurier
Wish Her Safe at Home by Stephen Benatar
The Secret History by Donna Tartt
The Book Thief by Marcus Zusak
The Bookshop by Penelope Fitzgerald
White Cargo by Felicity Kendal
William Shakespeare
The Town in Bloom by Dodie Smith
Look Back With Love by Dodie Smith
Look Back With Astonishment by Dodie Smith
Look Back With Mixed Feelings by Dodie Smith
Opening Night by Ngaio Marsh
Wise Children by Angela Carter
Mansfield Park by Jane Austen
Lover’s Vows by Elizabeth Inchbald
Sea Change by Elizabeth Jane Howard
At Freddie’s by Penelope Fitzgerald
Molly Fox’s Birthday by Deirdre Madden
Housekeeping by Marilynne Robinson
Famous Five series by Enid Blyton
Bookworm by Lucy Mangan
The Hobbit by JRR Tolkien
The Chronicles of Narnia by C.S. Lewis
Little House on the Prarie by Laura Ingalls Wilder
Golden Hill by Francis Spufford
Crossriggs by Jane and Mary Findlater
Emma by Jane Austen

Lila by Marilynne Robinson

LilaThe list of eponymous novels from the other day was going to include Lila by Marilynne Robinson – until I discovered that I never actually linked to my Shiny New Books review from StuckinaBook, apparently. And since it’s been so long, I’ll copy across the review here, rather than send you off to a set of SNB menus that aren’t the most recent. (But do check out the SNB update!)

It is difficult to write a review of a Marilynne Robinson novel that can even begin to do her writing justice. Reading one of her books makes me want to go and re-write all the other reviews I’ve written of other authors, toning them down, so that the words ‘excellent’ or ‘brilliant’ can be reserved for somebody of Robinson’s talent. Granted I’m not the best-read when it comes to 21st-century literature, but I would unhesitatingly call Robinson the greatest living writer – and in Lila, where she revisits the people and location of previous novels Gilead (2004) and Home (2008), she has continued this remarkable success.

Lila is present in the two previous novels – she is Mrs Ames, the wife of the aging minister whose first person narrative brings you so close to his thoughts and memories in Gilead. The couple are more incidental in Home, which focuses upon the neighbouring Boughton family, but in neither book is Lila anything comparable to an open book. This excerpt from Home is indicative:

Ames took off his glasses and rubbed his eyes. He felt a sort of wonder for this wife of his, in so many ways so unknown to him, and he could be suddenly moved by some glimpse he had never had before of the days of her youth or her loneliness, or of the thoughts of her soul.

If she is constant surprise to her husband, she is shadowy to the reader. We see her through the prism of Ames’ devotion, and his astonishment that he should (so late in life) find a wife and be given a son; Lila is a miracle he has been granted. His viewpoint is in no way possessive or selfish, but his grateful love means (naturally) we only see Lila as John sees her. We do not have access to her past or, really, her personality.

All that changes in Lila. Like Home, it is in the third person, but yet still offers an insight into the woman and her early life. We see her, ‘adopted’ (or rescued or kidnapped) by a woman called Doll; she lives in a world of poverty and uncertain loyalties. There is a group (a gang? a makeshift family?) that she is part of, but the boundaries of it are not secure. One day she and Doll may find themselves on the outside of it, and this daughter of man has nowhere to lay her head. We see recurring glimpses of this group – of the lynchpin, Doane, and of the event that separates Doll from Lila and sends her on her journey towards Gilead…

By showing us how different Lila’s early life is, it feels like coming home for the reader when we are eventually in Gilead. I spoke of the ‘people and location’ of Robinson’s earlier novels, but – more to the point – it is the community of those novels that Robinson has so brilliantly built up. A sense that they may judge or hurt each other as much as they love and protect, but that they are securely bound up with each other. This community requires a certain amount of trust – and it is trust that Lila finds so difficult to give. She is like a nervous animal, mistreated in the past and wary of sacrificing her independence for any sort of community.

The extraordinary triumph of Lila is seeing how the relationship develops between Ames and Lila, after she turns up in Ames’ church out of the blue. This is not a Cinderella story, or a heartwarming romance, or anything of the sort. The novel doesn’t fit into any sort of category. It seems too real to be fictional. We see the beautiful patience, honesty, faithfulness, and flaws of Ames that made him such a hero in Gilead – but heavily counterpointed by the impetuousness, wariness, and doubts of Lila. There is a poignant believability to the way she asks questions he cannot answer, then mistakes his silence for reproof; a painful beauty to his recognition that she may leave with his child, and that he can do little but make a home that he hopes will keep her peripatetic spirit. Their conversations are complex, mixing her doubts and his hopes; his long-earned wisdom and her vital awareness of the crueller side of human nature…

He said, “You know, there are things I believe, things I could never prove, and I believe them all day, everyday. It seems to me that my mind would stop dead without them. And here, where I have tangible proof” – he patted her hand – “when I’m walking along this road I’ve known all my life, every stone and stump where it has always been, I can’t quite believe it. That I’m here with you.”

She thought, Well that’s another way of saying it ain’t the sort of thing people expect. She had heard the word ‘unseemly’. Mrs. Graham talking to someone else about something else. No one said her belly was unseemly, no one said a word about how the old man kept on courting her, like a boy, when she was hard and wary and mainly just glad there was a time in her life when she could rest up for whatever was going to happen to her next. She felt like asking why he couldn’t see what everybody else had seen her whole life. But what if that made him begin to see it? First she had to get this baby born. And after that she might ask him some questions.

It is far too simplistic to say simply that these are two good people – both have deficiencies, and both are too well-drawn and complete to be tied down to any single adjective – but they are both deeply lovable people. Robinson writes with an intense subtlety about fairly ordinary characters – but, by examining them in such close detail, and showing so vividly what it is they want and what they fear, she has made the ordinary not only extraordinary but immortal. I don’t know if we will ever be given a return journey to the community of Gilead, but even if Robinson never writes another word, she is also (I believe) assured of a place among the immortals.

Home by Marilynne Robinson

Since I’ve got a review copy of Lila on my shelves (the third of Robinson’s novels to concern the good people of Gilead), I thought it was about time that I read Home (the second, from 2008, after 2004’s Gilead). When I read Gilead, I was completely bowled over. How could an elderly minister’s reminiscences create such a stunning work of fiction? On the strength of one book, Robinson became the living writer I admired the most. A subsequent read of Housekeeping did nothing to diminish this, and reading Home has cemented her position. Nobody else holds a candle to her.

Home covers much of the same time period as Gilead, although it is not a requirement to have read the former before you read the latter. Indeed, it would be interesting to read all three of this series in various orders – it’s been so long since I read Gilead that I have forgotten a lot of it, so it was a bit like coming to the characters for the first time. And, indeed, different characters take centre stage. While Gilead is narrated by the Rev. John Ames, Home looks at his neighbour’s house. Ames’ closest friend, Rev. Robert Broughton, is old and ailing. His wife has died, and he is looked after by the only child who has remained at home – Glory, a spinster who is kind, good, and a little regretful. The novel sees how they cope with the return, after twenty years, of Glory’s wastrel brother Jack.

His return will be familiar to readers of Gilead, and Ames certainly did not approve of him, but seeing him through the eyes of his family is a different matter. Glory is some years younger than him, separated by several siblings, and never felt that she knew him very well. Robert has longed for him to return – their dynamic is very much that of the Prodigal Son and the Forgiving Father – but even his patience and hope have their limits.

It’s very difficult to talk about great writers, or to pinpoint what makes them great. Home details the awkwardness of people who are biologically very close and emotionally very distant, but not through arguments or slamming doors. Instead (and no author does this better) Robinson shows us the silences – the emotions that family members cannot discuss, the past hurts they cannot confront, and the future hopes they dare not express. All the more impressive that this is done in the third person, so – although it feels like we know all three key players intimately – we are never actually taken into their perspective wholly. Being very close to my nuclear family, particularly my brother, I can’t quite understand the awkwardness of Glory and Jack’s relationship, but (being a family of introverts) I can understand the reluctance to discuss depths of emotions – and yet communicating them at the same time.

Like Gilead, there is a background of faith to the novel. But, where Gilead is a beautiful depiction of a life of faith, Glory is a little less certain. She seems occupied more with duty and goodness than with grace, try as she might. She sums up the theme of the book while musing on the Bible:

What a strange old book it was. How oddly holiness situated itself among the things of the world, how endlessly creation wrenched and strained under the burden of its own significance. “I will open my mouth in a parable. I will utter dark sayings of old, which we have heard and known, and our fathers have told us.” Yes there it was, the parable of manna. All bread is the bread of heaven, her father used to say. It expresses the will of God to sustain us in this flesh, in this life. Weary or bitter or bewildered as we may be, God is faithful. He lets us wander so we will know what it mean to come home.
‘Home’ is, unsurprisingly, the biggest quandary in Home. What makes a home? What does it mean to come home?  For Glory, home is a place of safety and continuity, but also a place of disappointment and a sense of failure. For Jack, it is a mirage and somehow dangerous. For Robert, it is chiefly an ideal in his mind.

One of the loveliest things in both this novel and Gilead is the friendship between neighbouring ministers. Friendship is depicted so seldom in literature, and it is touching to see one that has proved far more constant and successful than romantic or paternal relationships. And for readers like me who dearly love Ames, it is a joy to see him again – albeit frustrating at how little we see of him! Not to mention illuminating to see a different vantage of a man that any reader of Gilead will know intimately. It’s like hearing your best friend described by somebody who only knows them a little.

I quote this passage partly because Ames is in it, but mostly because it’s a lovely example of how beautifully Robinson writes a domestic scene:

Then Ames arrived with Lila and Roddy, the three of them in their church clothes, and she took her father into the parlor with them, the company parlor, where they sat on the creaky chairs no one ever sat on. It had been almost forgotten that the were not there just to be dismally ornamental, chairs only in the sense that the lamp stand was a shepherdess. Ames was clearly bemused by the formality her father had willed upon the occasion. The room was filled with those things that seem to exist so that children can be forbidden to touch them – porcelain windmills and pagodas and china dogs – and Robby’s eyes were bright with suppressed attraction to them.
Home has so many nuances and is so rich in insight that it would be futile to go much further. I don’t love it as much as Gilead – perhaps because I missed the first-person voice that Robinson handles so extraordinarily – but I am still amazed by what a great work it is. Sometimes I wonder which writer from our time will be remembered in future generations and centuries. If there is any justice in posterity, Robinson will be among that number.

Housekeeping – Marilynne Robinson

I don’t read many living authors, certainly not as a percentage of my overall reading, but I think there is only one whom I consider to be a ‘great’ – and that is Marilynne Robinson.  This opinion was formed on the basis of her novel Gilead, and has been strengthened by reading her first novel, Housekeeping (1980).  I don’t think it is as good as Gilead, but it is still a strikingly beautiful example of how astonishingly an author can use prose.  The opening lines are surprisingly stark, given the writing that follows:

My name is Ruth.  I grew up with my younger sister, Lucille, under the care of my grandmother, Mrs. Sylvia Forster, and when she died, of her sisters-in-law, Misses Lily and Nona Foster, and when they fled, of her daughter, Mrs. Sylvia Fisher.
This opening, hovering between comedy and tragedy without any indication which side the balance might fall, is an indication of the absence of men in Housekeeping.  Indeed, the only man who has stuck around makes a dramatic exit in the first pages of the novel – in a manner which reminded me of the opening to Ian McEwan’s Enduring Love, although Robinson’s came first.  The man is Ruth’s grandfather; the exit is on a train in the town where they live; the train derails from a bridge, and sinks through the ice to the depths of an enormous lake, drowning everyone on board and hiding their bodies from rescue.

Even this dramatic event, which reverberates slowly through the whole novel – (The derailment, though too bizarre in itself to have either significance or consequence, was nevertheless the most striking event in the town’s history, and as such was prized.  Those who were in any way associated with it were somewhat revered.) – is depicted almost quietly.  There were no proper witnesses, and Robinson does not take on the mantle of omniscience – instead, this tragic and would-be grandiose event is presented through veils of supposition and uncertainty.  I don’t think Robinson could be over-the-top if she tried.  See how calmly she depicts the aftermath, when describing the widow with her daughters (later to be Ruth’s mother and aunts):

She had always known a thousand ways to circle them all around with what must have seemed like grace.  She knew a thousand songs.  Her bread was tender and her jelly was tart, and on rainy days she made cookies and applesauce.  In the summer she kept roses in a vase on the piano, huge, pungent roses, and when the blooms ripened and the petals fell, she putt hem in a tall Chinese jar, with cloves and thyme and sticks of cinnamon.  Her children slept on starched sheets under layers of quilts, and in the morning her curtains filled with light the way sails fill with wind.  Of course they pressed her and touched her as if she had just returned after an absence.  Not because they were afraid she would vanish as their father had done, but because his sudden vanishing had made them aware of her.
Occasionally there are moments of plot in Housekeeping, and they can be quite significant moments, but nobody could call this a plot-driven novel.  No, it is certainly character-driven – and the central character is Ruth.  Robinson doesn’t capture her voice in quite the mesmeric way she captures John Ames’s in Gilead – but that is a feat I consider unmatched by any recent novelist, so she shouldn’t be judged too harshly on that.  We see the bleak, plain experience of young life through Ruth’s eyes – as her sister Lucille grows apart from her, as she looks back on their mother’s abandonment of them, as she tries to understand her increasingly eccentric aunt.  But mostly as she watches the world pass, and attempts to find her place in it.  There are certainly humorous elements to her observations, but perhaps the dominant note is poignancy: ‘That most moments were substantially the same did not detract at all from the possibility that the next moment might be utterly different.’

I am usually left unaffected by depictions of place and landscape in literature (it’s probably the reason that I loathed Return of the Native, for instance) but even I found Robinson’s depiction of Fingerbone – the atmospherically named small town – entirely consuming and impressive.  Whoever designed the cover for this edition did an exceptional job.  Maybe it’s cold, vast places which affect me, since I felt the same about Stef Penney’s The Tenderness of Wolves.

Fingerbone was never an impressive town. It was chastened by an outsized landscape and extravagant weather, and chastened again by an awareness that the whole of human history had occurred elsewhere.
At book group, someone mentioned that Housekeeping couldn’t have been set in the UK – we just don’t have that sort of isolated vastness anywhere.  Having the enormous lake, holding unfindable bodies and untraceable secrets, and the equally enormous railway bridge running over it – it is such a clever way to create a dramatic, memorable landscape, and define the town in an unsettling manner.  A trainline should signify connection and communication, but here it just seems to connote distance and almost terrifying grandeur. And the bridge comes back into play at the end of the novel, encircling the narrative with the same all-encompassing dominance that the bridge and lake have over Fingerbone.

I’ve not mentioned much of the plot, because (as I said) it is pretty immaterial to the chief pleasure of reading Housekeeping.  The novel is really like a very long poem.  It meanders, in the best possible way; it is impossible to speed-read, or at least it would be an exercise in wasted time to do so.  Instead, one ought to wallow and wander through Robinson’s prose.  Traditional storytelling has no place in Housekeeping – instead, a patchwork of moments is sewn together, creating a fabric which is unusual but beautifully captivating.

Is there no balm in…

.

Has there ever been a more convincing review than Rachel’s post on Gilead (2004) by Marilynne Robinson? Seriously, schoolchildren should analyse it as a piece of persuasive writing. Even so, my reading demands and tbr piles meant it took a month or two before the copy I already owned (bought at a church fair in Middle Chinnock, Somerset) worked its way to the top of my pile. And thank goodness it did. Gilead has probably got the most perfectly rendered ‘voice’ of any novel I’ve ever read. Actually, before I go any further, I’m simply going to give you the opening paragraph:

I told you last night that I might be gone sometime, and you said, Where, and I said, To be with the Good Lord, and you said, Why, and I said, Because I’m old, and you said, I don’t think you’re old. And you put your hand in my hand and you said, You aren’t very old, as if that settled it. I told you you might have a very different life from mine, and from the life you’ve had with me, and that would be a wonderful thing, there are many ways to live a good life. And you said, Mama already told me that. And then you said, Don’t laugh! because you thought I was laughing at you. You reached up and put your fingers on my lips and gave me that look I never in my life saw on any other face beside your mother’s. It’s a kind of furious pride, very passionate and stern. I’m always a little surprised to find my eyebrows unsinged after I’ve suffered one of those looks. I will miss them.

And so it begins. Gilead is in the form of one long letter, written in Iowa in 1956, from Reverend John Ames to his young son, for his son to read when he is an adult and Ames is dead. For Ames is a very old father, and one with a weak, dying heart. This letter is his attempt to put down all he would ever want to tell his son – stories; history; wisdom; love.

In the hands of a lesser writer, that would be a ruthlessly maudlin concept, but from that first paragraph onwards the reader is swept along by the gentle, lilting, genuine voice of Ames. His story starts with the histories of his father and grandfather – both, like him, clergymen, but with clashing ideals and tempestuous disagreements. He tells of his youthful memories of travelling with his father, to find the place his grandfather died. He tells of the pain his brother caused to the family, and of forgiveness. Throughout the letter he skips about with chronology – as we all do when thinking – and often returns to the events of present day. His son’s voice is rarely heard, but his actions are mentioned – with the deep affection of a father who waited long to become one:

I’d never have believed I’d see a wife of mine doting on a child of mine. It still amazes me every time I think of it. I’m writing this in part to tell you that if you ever wonder what you’ve done in your life, and everyone does wonder sooner or later, you have been God’s grace to me, a miracle, something more than a miracle. You may not remember me very well at all, and it may seem to you to be no great thing to have been the good child of an old man in a shabby little town you will no doubt leave behind. If only I had the words to tell you.

For a long time, Gilead doesn’t seem to have much plot. It is a mark of a great author that they can captivate you solely with characters and words, rather than events – Robinson certainly does that. But when the reader has settled into assuming that little will unsettle the memories and emotions of an old man, he turns to his oldest friend Robert Broughton – and, more particularly, John (Jack) Ames Broughton. Ames’ namesake is Broughton’s prodigal son, who returns to Gilead after bringing disgrace on the family. The nature of his wrongdoing is held a mystery from the reader, as Ames debates whether or not it is right to disclose it to his son – and so Robinson artfully adds yet another reason to read on.

But that is not the main reason. What makes Gilead so compelling is Ames himself. His voice is gentle, wise, kind, and sad. He is desperate at the idea of losing the opportunity to watch his son grow up, but he is equally amazed that God has granted him a son at all. Wonder fills him so often. Ames writes lovingly of his wife, and deprecatingly of his own failings. He is unfailingly honest and thoughtful – an utterly, utterly good man, and an incredibly lovable one. If Robinson were not a 60 year old woman (when this was written), I’d have assumed it was autobiographical – so convincing and enveloping is the voice of the narration.

Gilead is also an inspiring book to read as a Christian. I am surprised that it has been so successful, since it is such a deeply faith-filled book. I wasn’t sure whether it would appeal to a non-Christian – for, to me, so much of the novel’s richness lies in its incredible depiction of the beauty and depth of a life lived for God – but it seems I was wrong. A reader I met who was affirmedly atheist said she loved Gilead nonetheless. Robinson certainly doesn’t preach, except by example, and I suspect the honesty and accuracy of Ames’ letter would appeal to anybody – although perhaps some of the Biblical allusions would be lost. I especially liked his reference to himself as ‘one of the righteous for whom the rejoicing in heaven will be comparatively restrained’ – a reference to Luke 15:7: ‘I tell you that in the same way there will be more rejoicing in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who do not need to repent.’ If you’re not a Christian, please, please don’t let that put you off reading this beautiful novel – any lover of great writing will still love Gilead, I am sure.

I shan’t spoil the end of the novel, except to say that there is no real twist or change; just something simple, beautiful, and sad. I cried a tiny little bit, in the library, as I turned the final page. Gilead is truly one of the best pieces of writing I’ve ever encountered. Perhaps I shan’t remember all the details of the story, or the characters, but I doubt I’ll ever forget Ames, or the feeling of being submerged in his life and his words. It’s certainly a novel to which I will return – and it seems only fitting to leave you with his voice rather than my own, with another excerpt which touched me.

When you are an old man like I am, you might think of writing some sort of account of yourself, as I am doing. In my experience of it, age has a tendency to make one’s sense of oneself harder to maintain, less robust in some ways.

Why do I love the thought of you old? That first twinge of arthritis in your knee is a thing I imagine with all the tenderness I felt when you showed me your loose tooth. Be diligent in your prayers, old man. I hope you will have seen more of the world than I ever got around to seeing – only myself to blame. And I hope you will have read some of my books. And God bless your eyes, and your hearing also, and of course your heart. I wish I could help you carry the weight of many years. But the Lord will have that fatherly satisfaction.