What is your feeling about the Mortmain plot? It figures pretty largely in the story, but did it hold your interest in and of itself? (I sometimes wondered whether Mortmain was actually a literary genius or whether Simon, his biggest fan, was just a literary naïf.)
I also saw something pretty wonderful in the fact that Mortmain was completely stymied in his attempts to express himself and his brilliance and his "deep truths" about life while Cassandra could easily fill notebook after notebook with her everyday observations and "small truths," which were really big truths in the end, because HERS is the book we have and love and actually read. Do you think the author is saying something about what makes for good literature? hehe. Or maybe just something about the nature of teenage self-expression?)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
I found Mortmain very irritating. The idea that the guy would just quit working and shut himself up in his study, refusing to interact with the family and leaving them to fend for themselves regarding money, food, clothing and other basics of life is sort of inexcusable. He's a delicate genius and can't be forced to write? Well, why can't he hire himself out to do farm chores? I had no patience for Mortmain, not to mention Topaz's hideous babying of him. I probably would have been more satisfied if he had given up writing and just got a job.
As to Mortmain's writing, I'm not sure what to think. It certainly sounds like tripe to me, but I doubt I'm a good judge. I think it's quite possible the author is taking a little poke at "serious" literature.
Agreed. I found all the scenes involving Mortmain's struggle with his tormented genius fairly tedious. He should have penned over and over again "GET A JOB," not "THE CAT ON THE MAT."
Not only did the family have to fend for itself, but it had to protect his frail ego in doing so, like they didn't want him to see the hilarious budget they made showing each family member's earning capacity ("nil"). He had failed them utterly, but everyone had to pretend that wasn't so.
I think it's significant that the author often had Cassandra talk about having to go take care of him, like preparing his meals or whatever. Probably it was normal in the time period for a teenage daughter to have some of those responsibilities, but I thought her mentioning it so many times was meant to highlight a role reversal wherein she became the dutiful, responsible parent and he was the spoiled child.
I also thought it was significant that SHE is the one who gave him the idea to write "The Cat on the Mat." I mean, that turned into some complicated and, if you ask me, not very interesting literary experiment about the nature of intelligence and all that. But don't you think the author may have had Cassandra give him those words just as a way of saying get back to basics, write what you know, writing comes from experience. And Cassandra was living her life and having experiences, unlike Mortmain, so she had things to write about, even though they were ostensibly just "teenage girl" things. They were interesting because they were written by someone who could look outside of herself, unlike the self-centered Mortmain, and who could observe others and care about them and convey that sense in her writing.
At the end — what a glorious ending to a book — she proposes that she might fill her last page with "I love you," like Mortmain had done with her "cat on the mat." Then she concludes that would be a waste of paper. "Even a broken heart doesn't warrant a waste of good paper." What a supreme irony! Then a few paragraphs later she gives in to the genius of her heart and fills the margins — the margins! as though her story had been marginal to everything else — with "I love yous."
It's so marvelous.
Interesting point about Cassandra having to take care of her dad. I also noticed that seemed to be mentioned quite a few times.
The ending was marvelous! I loved it.
I think your analysis of Mortmain's writing vs. Cassandra's writing is excellent.
There was only room for one strong character in this story. Everyone else had their kind of foolishness. Did she really paint Topaz or Rose in any better light than her father?
It seemed the distance b/w the world of "serious literature" and Cassandra's understanding of it was another way to show her childlikeness, to distance her from the world of adults. Same as her disinterest in fancy clothes or whatever else.
Of course she had to return home while Rose and Topaz were in London. It was 1930 something. I never sensed it was a burden for her or that she wished he could get his own tea.
The imprisonment at the end was brilliant, and entertaining, as exciting to read as the beginning of the book for me.
Yes, the imprisonment was delightful!
I loved the imprisonment! I was so annoyed at Topaz for missing its genius.
Post a Comment