Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
winterwren

The Sea, the Sea Discussion Questions

Recommended Posts

These questions are taken from the Reading Guides site.

1. Charles's house, Shruff End, is in many ways a character in its own right. Intricately described, the house is explicitly referred to as gloomy and cave-like and can in many ways stand as a metaphor for Charles's own mind.

What are some of the ways that events and features in Shruff End indicate Charles's mental state?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi winterwren,

 

Can I just check, before I launch in...are you intending that this thread will gather all sorts of possible discussion questions on it, as the title sort of suggests, or would you rather we dived in and answered that question here, and started different threads for other questions/topics as they occur to us.

 

Sorry, feeling a bit dense today ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Claire!

 

Am I supposed to know what I am doing? :eek:

 

Well, I have no idea. :o

 

I was thinking that it might be easier to keep questions in one place but then again I wasn't sure. In the long run I just decided to jump in and post a question and see what happens.

 

What do you think is best?

 

Trudy (Winterwren)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Trudy,

 

Fair enough :) I guess we're all making it up as we go along, aren't we.

 

I guess my instinct would be to have a different thread for each question, so they didn't all overlap and get confused as they got answered.....but who knows what will work best :confused:

 

Off out, very soon, but will be back in the next day or two to have a go at answering/discussing this a bit more.

 

Let's have a question/thread about marriage, somehow - that seems a pretty key theme to the book.

 

And something about how and why the ending is so, well, "bitty"!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well. That really sounds okay to me, too. But some questions just don't get answered. How about I post all the questions I can think of here at this thread? You post questions here too! Then find one that really looks interesting and we could make a new thread with it.

 

The only thing that I was thinking was with only a few people reading and discussing the book you sure could end up with a lot of different threads for one book - and maybe that's okay. It just seemed a bit much to me.

 

Anyway, I truly don't really much care - talking about the book is what is rewarding and I can adapt pretty easily to what ever happens, I think.

 

SO I will post more questions here and then you decide what you want to do when you pop back in - what ever it is, I will be in favor of it! I am really glad that you enjoyed the book.

 

Trudy :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2. Compare the three female characters—the mundane and muddled Hartley, the demure and clinging Lizzie, and the fierce and implacable Rosina—in their attitudes toward love and their approaches to Charles.

 

Are any of them free?

 

Do they seek freedom?

 

Compare Murdoch's depiction of them with her handling of the male characters.

 

Is sexual difference and "the nature of women" a theme in the book?

 

 

3. Charles repeatedly and self-consciously draws attention to the diary/ memoir format of his writing, contrasting it to his previous writings, which were "written in water." In fact his withdrawing to Shruff End to write his memoir provides the very foundation and center of everything that happens in the novel.

 

How does Murdoch use the natural self-absorption of this medium to render a view of Charles that he himself does not have access to?

 

What are other examples of his self-absorption?

 

 

4. The specter of demons, fates, and controlling forces are sprinkled throughout the novel.

 

What are some of the examples of these "relentless mechanisms"? What is their significance?

 

Is The Sea, The Sea a fatalistic novel?

 

What examples might counter this assertion?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I rather fancy the question about the different female characters - so I'm going to launch in and start a thread all of it's own for it. Do wander over and join me there!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Similar Content

    • By cherrypie
      I have just started this book having finished Love for Lydia by H.E. Bates only yesterday. Although the two novels are very different, both language and story, they were both written in the mid 20th century. This may seem daft, I am no great expert on literature, but they do have the same feel about them. It was obvious from the very beginning of the novels that neither of them were modern novels and yet they do not contain the type of language or are written in the style of most of the 19th century literature that I have read. It seems that no matter how different the style or language used any novel carries a flavour of the time in which it is written as much as the time in which it is set.
       
      That all said I am beginning to enjoy the book. It is not going to be an easy read as Murdoch seems to like to explore the thoughts and feelings of each character as well as telling the story. The story has taken place in two places so far, Whitehall and Dorset. Although some of the characters are different in each setting some do appear in both settings but the main character appears to be John Ducane a Whitehall civil servant. He is a complicated character and a deep thinker and has been given the task of heading an internal enquiry into a suicide of a colleague.
       
      So far there has been a real feeling off the sixties about the book when I blieve it to have been set. This has not been stated that is just my guess. Although seemingly quite light-heartedly written so far I suspect that the story will take a sinister turn at some stage.
    • By Claire
      I've just come to the end of the Pre-History section of the book.

      Maybe not a very literary question - but, do you like the narrator, Charles Arrowby?

      I guess there's two aspects of that. Do you think you would warm to him as a person, if he was real, and you met him?

      And, how well does he work, within the book, at making you want to keep reading? Is he an effective "voice"?

      In most books told in the first person, I tend to warm to the narrator, whoever they are, it's just my natural reaction - (do other people find that too?) - but it's been quite an interesting experience to read the first section of this book, with really mixed feelings about the narrator. I found myself trying to like him - I appreciated his attempts at honesty about himself and his own awareness that he was unreliable narrator, even while he tried not to be.

      But having read Lizzie's letter, which moved me by it's struggle to be truthful about her love - his reaction to it as being from a "silly inconsistent woman" made me want to slap him and I was much more ambivalent about him from that point onwards.

      (He certainly works well, to make me want to keep reading, by the way - I'm really enjoying this book )

      What does anyone else think of him?
    • By Claire
      Anyone interested in giving this question a go....(borrowed by Winterwren from an online readers guide, I think)
       

      Likely to be spoilers, I suspect, if anyone hasn't finished reading the book yet

      A very daunting set of questions, I think, but maybe we could nibble away at different aspects of them, between us.

      I actually felt the book was more focussed on the nature of marriage, rather than the nature of women. There was a lot of small comments here and there from different characters about how marriage is a mystery, and no-one can tell from the outside whether it works or not, or whether it is happy or not. Charles on his drunken night out with Peregrine in London spent some time discussing the marriages of certain friends and speculating on how happy or otherwise they were. He seemed to take great satisfaction in deciding that most of them weren't.

      Plus his apparently very deliberate acts to break up Peregrine's marriage with Rosina - the impression I got was that he did that much more because he resented their relationship, rather than because he actually wanted Rosina for himself.

      And Hartley, somehow, mysteriously, wanting to stay in her marriage, despite it's apparent misery (in Charles judgement, as least) - a very mysterious marriage, and yet somehow it seemed to work for the two of them within it. Is Hartley free?? I guess so, yes. Free to choose to remain with Ben, despite Charles efforts....

      (I'm not really answering the original questions at all am I! Never mind - I'm interested in any comments the rest of you have, all the same)
       
    • By DJgib
      Just wondering what you think of Charles' method of 'convincing' Heartley to leave her husband for him.

      I was extremely annoyed about how he went about it. I felt he didn't give her enough time, forcing himself on her and saying things like 'you belong to me now'. He never listened to what she had to say, when she said he didn't understand he talked over it and he ignored her saying she wanted to return to Ben.

      It seems to me that this behaviour is an illustration of Charles' arrogance. He may truly love Heartley, but he is also driven by a desire for power and to get what he wants. If he loved Heartley in a true, altruistic way, he would allow her to follow her own course.

      On the other hand it may be argued (as Charles does himself) that Heartley would never leave Ben if she was only shown the door, she had to be dragged through it if she was ever going to leave.
    • By Claire
      What did you think of the ending of the book?? I was a bit puzzled and unsure about it. I was expecting some sort of dramatic climax, I guess, though unsure as to what it might be. So I was surprised when it just of muddled about for a bit and drifted off very gently.

      I guess it was a hopeful ending. Charles seems to have come to some sort of acceptance of his own past and no longer be driven by whatever internal demons were compelling him onwards. He seemed happy to let others do their own thing, rather than needing things to revolve around himself so much....

      Still not sure about it though. Did anyone else find it satisfying, or disappointing?
×