Jump to content

The Heart is a Lonely Hunter - various thoughts

Recommended Posts

  • 2 weeks later...

A very good read, even if depressing and down beat. A very accomplished book for someone in their early twenties. McCullers seems to have drawn on her own aspirations when creating the character of Mick but putting her in a setting of abject poverty as opposed to her own circumstances. Singer, Blount, Copeland, Brannon and the rest of the cast and the setting were so well observed it's hard to fathom where her understanding emerges from. The story gives much pause for thought on the nature of isolation and loneliness, do we deliberately seek it out, is it embedded in our nature, can we break the barriers and save ourselves?

Having finished the book I read the introduction by Kasia Boddy. I regret doing that now, for me it over analysed what had been a very thought provoking book, it took the edge off, and interfered with my personal thoughts. I'll be more careful in the future!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good thing I didn't have an introduction in my edition, then. I don't like them much anyway. Same as you, I was quite surprised how someone that young could have written a book like that.

I've had this book on my TBR list for ages, the title just fascinated me. And it is a good title for a good book. I thoroughly enjoyed reading this. Yes, it is sad but there is so much to think about, so many characters that you can follow. And even though there is a lot of despair, there also is a lot of hope in there, don't you think? Maybe her young age made that shine through?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with you Momo, I was certainly left with an element of hope. I think the young Mick balances out the older characters and you are left with the feeling that just maybe, she will turn her life around and do something about her aspirations.


I did learn a few things from the introduction, but on the whole it reminded me of those awful exam type questions we get with our library book group read. Thankfully we usually skip the most absurd of them and enjoy chatting about the book instead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly. I have given up reading introductions, they usually contain spoilers. Even if it is a classic, that doesn't mean someone doesn't read it for the first time and doesn't want to know that a certain character dies or another one marries etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I've read just the first two chapters so far. Another vote for the language: it feels like it says a lot, but still has a lot of space around it. Sparse, I suppose you could say.


The characters are starting to come into view, especially Biff, after the long night described in chapter two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Without reading any of the above comments, or the introduction in the book, because I want to 'discover' this story with my own eyes, I just wanted to say that I am about two-thirds through and am thoroughly enjoying the read. Such beautiful, thoughtful and insightful language. I'm not even sure I want it to end!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sadly, I've finished reading the book. Yes, it was quite sad in places and I am so sorry that I have nothing more of it to read.


Having now read through the comments I am glad I didn't read the Introduction. Having seen your reaction to it Cassie, I don't think I will bother to read it now - although I had started to read it last night.


Like others, I loved the prose, the deeply drawn characters and the slow way things evolved. For me it added to the feelings of the states of mind and the weather.


In fact the weather seems to appear quite a lot in the book. McCullers seems to use it as another character for me. You could almost feel the intense heat, the awfulness of the continual rain.


I cannot remember who suggested this book, but would like to say a big thank you. I would never have picked this book up. I don't like the cover on my Penguin Classic edition and neither the title nor the author's name seemed encouraging. Oh, how wrong a reader can be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not for me, I'm afraid. Characters simplistic, language simple and deadly monotonous. My favourite character is the still silent centre who talks with his hands - though he's obviously set up as a 'goody' and will help everyone. I just longed for a real narrator, hating the quasi-internal monologues of one word sentences, the 'prose' of each 'speaker' often like that of many others in this collections of lonely hunters. It's not only John Singer who's struggling with language but the author herself. Give me some well-muscled prose for a change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Carson McCullers, The Heart is a Lonely Hunter


Carson McCullers’ debut novel continues to thrill readers, at least according to reviewers on Amazon, but I found this naive, simplistic and sentimental tract a bit of a bore. I totally agree with the Dubai Reader when she says ‘the plot is slow, tediously slow at times and I couldn’t help but wonder what the point was to all these people wandering in and out of Singer’s room.’ Singer, by the way, is the deaf mute who listens to all the other carefully selected victims oppressed by society: a drunken labour agitator, a tomboy who dreams of getting a piano, a very observant cafe owner and an idealistic black doctor. The point is that only Singer listens, listens to all their troubles on behalf of the reader, who is expected to empathise.


‘The book makes for excellent discussion,’ the same reader concedes, but is that the main aim of reading a novel? I read a novel in the first place to engage with the protagonist, to get inside the skull of another consciousness, to understand how it feels to be him or her. I do not want a novel that bores me with big issues, that presents types, counters to be moved around on a chess board: the handicapped, the drunk, the idealist, the informant, the outcast. McCullers picks her types and then pushes them into situations. They are not interesting as persons in their own right.


Much of the gushing response to this novel seems to derive from the author’s ‘wonderful’ writing, but not one of the reviewers on Amazon quotes a line from the book’s banal and dreary prose. Another reader admits to not ‘feeling any empathy towards any of the characters.’ Exactly! And why? Because the naivety of the young author is revealed in her simplistic internal monologues. I wouldn’t go so far as to say they all ‘talk’ alike (Blount is given some remarkably cogent – but most unlikely – drink-inspired speeches). But on the whole both the language and the acts of all four major characters are stilted (Singer’s hands always in his pockets, Copeland always discreetly spitting into his handkerchief - that's them tagged!).


McCullers’s prose for the most part is undistinguished and juvenile and I feel it would be better had she retained her naive voice, for when she seeks to sway the reader she employs a ludicrously unconvincing bombast. Thus Biff, the good drunkard: ‘in a swift radiance of illumination ... saw a glimpse of human struggle and of valour. Of the endless fluid passage of humanity through endless time. And of those who labour and of those who – one word – love. His soul expanded. For in him he felt a warning, a shaft of terror. Between the two worlds he was suspended....The left eye delved narrowly into the past while the right eye gazed wise and affrighted into the future.’ Biff here is so obviously a spokesman for the author. You’d better believe it, but sadly I didn’t. I didn’t trust the teller or the tale.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, tagesmann. Some books we can only read for pleasure and there is not much to talk about. Others might seem tedious or hard to read but they generate the best discussions. I usually prefer the latter because it makes you enjoy a book even more. We all have read a book for a discussion we didn't much ilke but were happy to have read in the end. In all my book club years there are only a few I wouldn't have read if I'd known in advance how horrible they would be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I've just finished. What a wonderful book, despite the bleak ending.



Following the sudden brutal death of Singer, it's hard to imagine an even darker turn. But Mick ending up working a dead-end job that she hates and getting in return, not a piano, but to take over someone's hire purchase payments on a radio - I think that manages to just about sum up the weary hopelessness of modern life.

(Blount is given some remarkably cogent – but most unlikely – drink-inspired speeches)
True, those speeches don't sound like someone who is really worse for wear from drink. On the other hand, I wonder if that's not what Blount was hearing? I have in my younger days (allegedly) been known to wax lyrical on profound subjects after taking a drink or two. Except, it didn't sound too lyrical, or even sensible, to those listening...but in my head, what oratory! ;-)


language simple and deadly monotonous
Reflects the deadly monotonous nature of life perhaps?


I cannot remember who suggested this book, but would like to say a big thank you. I would never have picked this book up.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 3 years later...

I've just finished reading this and thorougly enjoyed it.  I made a conscious decision not to rush through it so that I could savour it. What an accomplished novel for a 23 year old!


The prose was amazing and the characters, I felt, were well drawn and how unusual to use a deaf/mute as a central figure. Life in the deep south during, I got the impression, the depression.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

A superb exploration of loneliness and the roles we are forced to play.

The book revolves around a deaf/mute named John Singer. After his friend (also a deaf/mute) is put into an institution, Singer moves into a new room where, slowly but surely, four characters come to view him as a kind of spiritual leader. They go to him to tell of their woes, their frustrations, their dreams. Because he can't speak, he is forced into the role of listener (whether her wants to be or not) and they quickly transform him into a blank canvas for their worldview. Unbeknownst to them, however, Singer also has a life. He too requires a figure in his life whom can give meaning to his loneliness (this being his deaf/mute friend). That Singer has his own life never occurs to them. He has been unpersoned by them in their desire for him to have the answers.

The four of them begin to visit him on a regular basis. First, there is Biff the café owner who represents the middle-class view. Then Jake Blount, the working-class alcoholic. Then Dr. Copeland, the African American idealist. And finally, Mick, a young girl who dreams of being a musician but who is inevitably forced into conforming towards a more conventional role as a woman.

Each of these people are oppressed by the role they must play in life. Blount and Copeland seek answers in a simplistic and utopian form of Marxism. Mick in romantic ideals and Biff, the most important character in my opinion, in hoping for a better tomorrow.

The writing is wonderful, full of fluid and detached prose which works perfectly (despite often not being my cup of tea). McCullers has a great gift for telling a character's story whilst simultaneously placing you in another moment. She can switch between the two with ease. The narrative flows nicely and slowly builds a realistic world. At no point does she throw in an affair or a murder. The book essentially has no plot (my preferred type) and simply tells a self-contained story of lonely people looking to escape the chains that life has put them in.

I interpreted the ending as ultimately pessimistic though. It ends with Mick showing signs of slowly conforming to her role as a socially acceptable female. She now wears earrings, has embraced the 9 to 5, and is moving away from her tomboy persona. Some may view this as a positive (that she is blossoming) but I saw it as Mick succumbing to the social norms, to the daily grind.

Because, eventually, we all do.

A fantastic debut novel. Highly recommended.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Similar Content

    • By lunababymoonchild
      Famous for The Heart is a Lonely Hunter it did not occur to me that she had written anything else.  Until this popped up on my Instagram feed.  Apparently it's her final novel.  And what a novel it is!
      Set in the American South, in a small town run by white people just around the time when segregation was being abolished.  It concentrates on the lives of four men : J T Malone, a middle-aged pharmacist, John Clane an elderly judge whose mind is beginning to wander, Jester grandson of the judge and closet homosexual  - all of whom are white - and Sherman a blue-eyed mix-raced black man around the same age as Jester (late teens early twenties).  There are other themes running through the book which are not difficult to access but not all of them are obvious.  All of their lives are intricately intermixed and they affect each other. 
      The prose is lyrical and sweet and a joy to read.  The story is good, the characters believable, and the title is referred to in the book to explain it's meaning - and it's a profound meaning so I won't spoil it.
      It's very well worth reading and not a long book, some 201 pages, but it does contain the N-word in several different forms.  Although this was used in dialogue and showed how people, both black and white, spoke at the time it was not there to indicate an insult.  It is there, though and I thought that I should mention it.
      Highly recommended.
    • By Flingo
      Rescued Thread When Bill has caught up with some things, please can we have the forum for this back, and then get it moved? Cheers!

      Flingo 8th June 2006 11:06 PM

      I thought in Bill's absense we could start a couple of threads about Holes here and have the discussion that so many people are keen to do before we forget what we want to say. It should be able to be moved once the new board is open, shouldn't it?

      So what are people's first impressions? I know some people have finished it - but please remember anyone could call in here, so spoiler if necessary!

      I really enjoyed Holes. My children's librarian mentor has been urging me to read this for ages but I had never got round to it, and am now really disappointed that I left it so long!

      It's really clever, although it takes a bit to understand where all the threads of the story are going.

      The writing is so easy to read, and you feel drawn in almost immediately. I could felt the heat of Camp Green Lake radiating out of the book - a huge acheivement!

      megustaleer 8th June 2006 11:34 PM

      I read it some years ago, and loved it. I really don't know why it has not been a bigger hit as a 'crossover' book. I thought that the way all those plot threads were neatly tied up was just so satisfying, and so clever!

      Have just checked my reading list, and it is six years since I read it, and I can still remember quite a lot of it; it really made an impression!

      katrina 9th June 2006 06:02 PM

      Hey, this is my second read of this book in a year, as I had to read it at the start of my PGCE course, its a really popular keystage 3 yext. I prefered it this time around, the first time I was annoyed by it, but I can't remember why now.

      Thought the writing was good, and the sense of the lake and the heat were well depicted.

      Momo 9th June 2006 06:20 PM

      I can well imagine that it's six years since Meg read it. My oldest son read it when he was a year younger than my youngest one is now and he is five years older. It had just come out otherwise he would have done it earlier as my younger one has.
      Anyway, even though both my boys had read it, I never did so myself. Somehow it always seemed like a book for little boys. So, I was pleasantly surprised when it wasn't that at all. (We even have the DVD and I never watched that either!)
      I will recommend this book to anyone. It's a quick read, yet very interesting and there is a lot in this. More than last month's read.

      katrina 10th June 2006 08:30 AM

      I was wondering if anybody had watched the film version of the book, if I have time this week I'm going to borrow it from school and take a peak at it, I've heard its quite a good adaptation

      Flingo 10th June 2006 10:45 AM

      I picked it up on Wednesday, and will be watching it tomorrow.

      I think we ought to have a thread about the film in this section, so that we can discuss comparisons and similarities? Whoever watches it first can start that!

      megustaleer 16th June 2006 08:56 AM

      belweb says on another thread that she thought the plot was full of holes! I beg to differ! The thing that I like about this book is that there are no 'holes', everything is all neatly sewn up at the end!

      Admittedly a lot of the connections are contrived, but I thought that was part of the humour of the book. My reactions were along the lines of 'Well I Never!! and 'Who'd've Thought It!' , and I thought it was all very cleverly brought to a satisfying (if not necessarily satisfactory) conclusion.

      I wouldn't have accepted the neat conclusion in a serious adult novel, but 'Horses for Courses', eh? And there's plenty of food for thought in there, too.

      The book probably suffered from being read in the middle of reading for an Eng. Lit. degree. I'm sure it wouldn't stand comparison to the other books occupying belwebb's thoughts.

      Momo 16th June 2006 01:45 PM

      I don't know either what kind of holes belwebb saw in this novel. As Meg already mentions, and we all should consider this, this is a children's book. We cannot expect deep meanings that you will only understand after studying English Lit.

      belwebb 16th June 2006 05:28 PM
      Yes, you've made some valid points. However, when you say 'contrived' I think that's the word I should have used - it was incredibly contrived, but then, like you say, I was in the middle of an English lit course!

      elfstar 16th June 2006 06:38 PM

      I enjoyed this book, it had a nice 'roundness' to it,there was no unhappy or unresolvesd ending for the protagonist, the characters were not as deep as they could have been but it is a childrens book and a such it was very acceptable

      donnae 19th June 2006 11:17 PM

      I really enjoyed this book. I loved how the story of the past was neatly interlinked with Stanley's story. Contrived maybe, but very enjoyable still. At least it ties up a lot more ends than last month's read!

      As this was a children's story, I liked the manner in which the anti-racialism was dealt with, not too heavy-handed. There were some obvious morals going on in the book, but they didn't overshadow the story.

      There is a sequel to Holes called Small Steps. This follows the lives of Armpit and Xray.

      Holes is a book I will be encouraging my children to read - I think they will all enjoy it. One of my daughters has watched the film and enjoyed it. Flingo, have you watched it yet?

      Adrian 20th June 2006 01:50 AM

      I was thinking the same thing, donnae. It's pretty obvious when you read it.

      megustaleer 20th June 2006 09:34 PM

      Because it is a children's book, and apparantly a straightforward account of Stanley's misadventures, perhaps there is a tendency to whiz through it without picking up the clues?

      Once you know how it all fits together, of course, a lot of it was clearly hinted at in advance.

      Hindsight's a wonderful thing!

      Adrian 20th June 2006 09:52 PM

      I certainly did that, not giving the book its due respect and racing through it. I'll have to re-read it, or maybe listen to the audio version.

      Flingo 23rd June 2006 08:47 PM
      I did watch it - though it was really nicely done. Louis Sachar actually wrote the screenplay, which I think helped keeping it true to the book.

      Recommend watching it if you enjoyed the book.
    • By Adrian
      This is for people who have read just the first few chapters. If you haven't yet, reading the following will be a spoiler.

      I watched the R&J review and have bought the book. So far I'm maybe a dozen pages into it.

      I'm not loving the double first-person narrative. It reminds me of Kevin Sampson's Outlaws, where the same story is told from multiple viewpoints. I find it just detracts from the story, and makes the book feel a bit gimmicky. Maybe it'll grow on me as I read more, and it certainly won't stop me reading it.

      Secondly, I'm not yet buying into this "Chrono-Displacement Disorder" plot device. It's too Sci-Fi for my liking, and just too "handy" for the author: "I need to have the guy time travel, so here's how I've made it happen." I'm hoping it's resolved later on. If it's a premise I have to swallow just so the book could be written I'll be disappointed.

      As you might have guessed, I'm not wholly convinced just yet.

      What's your first impressions of the book?
    • By Adrian
      I'm about halfway through (he's spending Christmas with her family and has just found out her Mum's a manic depressive - and after reading this book, love, so am I), and unless I get I get some positive feedback here, I'm giving up.

      I posted my first impressions earlier, and I'm afraid it's getting worse.

      Firstly it didn't grab me from the start and I read other books inbetween - always a bad sign. Still, I vowed to stick with it, and once I got past the awkward narrative structure it improved. The enforced double-narrative seemed a little contrived, and I felt whenever the authour switched voices in mid-scene Niffenegger was really forcing the change of voice to make it obvious it was now the other person narrating. Seemed a bit like Kevin Samson writing in Outlaws, where each narrator gets his own unique voice.

      Secondly, the basic premise of the novel, time travel, is mishandled and cack-handedly written. Two versions of himself in the same time frame? (Believe me ladies, if we could do that to ourselves the human race would be extinct). Some evolutionary mishap in the human genome being allowed to rewrite the laws of physics? Those I could live with, but TTW is just an affront to basic common sense. I keep asking myself questions instead of losing myself in the book. Why just appear now? Why just disappear now? More important is the where? How does he go to a particular place as well a particular time?

      Also, the nastiness of the bloke: "I can't help myself so I can do whatever I like." Beat people up? Sure! Rob and steal? Why not! Buy stocks cheap? Who wouldn't! Run naked through the neighbourhood? Well, I tried this, and the police would just not believe my story!

      Most importantly, I don't care about the love story. So he loves her and they love each other, and so forth. I find both of them so insufferable that I don't care about their relationship(s).

      I'm half-heartedly interested in the secondary goings on. I like Kimy, and I like Clare's room-mate, but can't stand the room-mate's boyfriend.

      My current thinking is, "This is not a book to tossed away lightly. It is to hurled with great force."

      I'd like either an incentive to finish it (bearing in mind I have a long list of others waiting on my TBR pile) or, preferably, a precis of the ending. I'm guessing she dies of some disease he can't prevent, and he knows it (of course he knows it, he just can't get involved in any ethical situation that would ruin the house-of-cards plot), but doesn't tell her.

      God, I hate them both. Hey Audrey, try going back in time before Stephen Fry wrote Making History.
  • Create New...