Fire and Hemlock
Nov. 12th, 2007 10:49 pmSo I was rereading Diana Wynne Jones' Fire and Hemlock, which I have done about once a year since I was maybe eleven, and I was thinking about the ending.
Which is a famously obscure ending, in the sense that I have spoken with several people who aren't clear on what actually happens, and if what, then not why. And I have always had a clear sense-- well, not of being *certain* about the ending, not enough to theorize about it or explain it to anybody, but that it had an emotional logic to it that was sufficiently compelling to me that I rested satisfied on that.
Only, this last read-through I'd been noticing that the emotional logic felt strangely familiar, and not in the I-have-read-this-book-a-zillion-times way, but in the I-have-been-spending-a-great-deal-of-time-thinking-about-something-identical-to-this-which-wasn't-this way (which is of course a much rarer sensation), and I had that metaphorical sense of having a word on the tip of my tongue, what was it, I had it a moment ago, any second now...
And then it clicked, and now I feel confident in saying not only that the ending of Fire and Hemlock makes perfect sense, but that I can explain it; and I have independent corroboration, for I found an excerpt from an article Jones wrote which confirmed my reading, and here is the relevant sentence: "Starting with what I felt about heroes and the heroic, I went on to describe my passion for cello music and how a rereading of Eliot's Four Quartets sparked the actual book and gave rise to the presence of a quartet of musicians in it."*
And I said, ha! Now I can do an explicatory write-up!
And then I thought, wait, no, this is probably one of those things everybody who reads DWJ eventually finds out-- the article is dated 2004, other people must have been paying attention when she started talking about it, more than I was as I am bad at these things-- and I just missed it, so there wouldn't be any point.
Should I?
* And if anyone has access to either the rest of this article or to the paper on Fire and Hemlock that DWJ mentions having given at the end of the paragraph I quoted, I would be most grateful to be able to read that.
Which is a famously obscure ending, in the sense that I have spoken with several people who aren't clear on what actually happens, and if what, then not why. And I have always had a clear sense-- well, not of being *certain* about the ending, not enough to theorize about it or explain it to anybody, but that it had an emotional logic to it that was sufficiently compelling to me that I rested satisfied on that.
Only, this last read-through I'd been noticing that the emotional logic felt strangely familiar, and not in the I-have-read-this-book-a-zillion-times way, but in the I-have-been-spending-a-great-deal-of-time-thinking-about-something-identical-to-this-which-wasn't-this way (which is of course a much rarer sensation), and I had that metaphorical sense of having a word on the tip of my tongue, what was it, I had it a moment ago, any second now...
And then it clicked, and now I feel confident in saying not only that the ending of Fire and Hemlock makes perfect sense, but that I can explain it; and I have independent corroboration, for I found an excerpt from an article Jones wrote which confirmed my reading, and here is the relevant sentence: "Starting with what I felt about heroes and the heroic, I went on to describe my passion for cello music and how a rereading of Eliot's Four Quartets sparked the actual book and gave rise to the presence of a quartet of musicians in it."*
And I said, ha! Now I can do an explicatory write-up!
And then I thought, wait, no, this is probably one of those things everybody who reads DWJ eventually finds out-- the article is dated 2004, other people must have been paying attention when she started talking about it, more than I was as I am bad at these things-- and I just missed it, so there wouldn't be any point.
Should I?
* And if anyone has access to either the rest of this article or to the paper on Fire and Hemlock that DWJ mentions having given at the end of the paragraph I quoted, I would be most grateful to be able to read that.
no subject
Date: 2007-11-13 04:17 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-11-13 04:25 am (UTC)I don't need to understand things in order to be happy with them, which is lucky, because I hardly ever understand anything, but I always thought Jones did fantastic, amazing endings. I think the obscurity that bothers lots of people is the same thing that gives me the happy feeling that something very complicated and mysterious has happened, so complicated and mysterious that I couldn't even say what it is. Which is not to say I wouldn't be very happy to find out.
no subject
Date: 2007-11-13 09:03 am (UTC)(and also, great icon! great movie! happy to meet
no subject
Date: 2007-11-13 05:16 am (UTC)Yes; I have seen the statement to which you refer, but I still want to read your thoughts about Fire and Hemlock. I mean, come on.
no subject
Date: 2007-11-13 05:26 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-11-13 06:26 am (UTC)And thank you so very much!
no subject
Date: 2007-11-13 05:32 am (UTC)Nine
no subject
Date: 2007-11-13 05:34 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-11-13 06:09 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-11-13 06:45 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-11-13 09:08 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-11-13 11:34 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-11-13 12:18 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-11-13 01:40 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-11-13 07:03 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-11-13 09:47 pm (UTC)Not that I can stop from yipping.
---L.
no subject
Date: 2007-11-13 10:40 pm (UTC)I have always had the sense that I *got* it, but it is not a clear sense and I don't think I can expositate upon it.
no subject
Date: 2007-11-14 10:15 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-11-15 05:21 am (UTC)