I had a hard time actually liking Laura. It wasn't that she did anything I disliked, or that she bored me, exactly, it was just that there never seemed to be anything there to like. Following her life was interesting, and I was fascinated by the character of Satan (who strikes me as the only one really worth looking closely at, considering how different he is from the stereotypical Milton-esque Satan we see everywhere in literature), but Laura herself just came off like a tour guide, there only to be our way around a novel that does not really need her. Everything happens to Laura, except for her move to Great Mop, which is the only real initiative she takes.
Friday, September 25, 2009
Passivity in Lolly Willowes
The problem with Lolly Willowes is that I was never able to reach beneath the surface of the novel. The writing is very sparse, as we discussed, but I feel like there is also very little character development. Lolly herself remains very static, from her life in the city to that in Great Mop; even as exciting and interesting things happen in her life, that is all they do: happen in her life. She barely reacts, and when she does, it is with almost unfailingly simple acceptance. Even when she considers taking a more active role, such as when she is trying to find a way to remove Titus from her life, it is from a very removed standpoint. She assumes the Devil will do the job for her, and even if he does not, her thoughts on Titus are not those of a relation or even an acquaintance. She simply thinks he should be gone, and in a very distant way wonders how that might come about.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
So, if the devil is more interesting, and I agree, he certainly is. What does Warner's depiction of the devil do for us as readers? Does he symbolize or represent something especially un-satanesque or are we still to see him as some sort of force opposing another--and what is this other force?
ReplyDelete