An unusually long, detailed, and interesting discussion of DIVIDED HEAVEN seemed to demonstrate that (1) it IS possible to work with a limited number of available copies, advance notice and cooperation provided; (2) additional material supplied before the session, such as Maren's introductory essay and the article raising translation issues, really add substance to our sessions. I believe Maren has a proposal on this very subject …
At any rate, here are just a few of the issues discussed. Please add and comment, I know I missed a lot of the back and forth!
- The setting – which was far more than a setting – of the GDR as the wall went up: the newness of this subject and viewpoint to most of the book group. Questions as to why someone studying to be a teacher would be assigned to a factory – the proletariat as "ruling class" – the aftermath of fascism and the war.
- Women's relative freedom and equality in the GDR – was this contradicted/undermined by Rita's breakdown?
- The characters – were they flat? Stereotypical? Determined by their environment in a way we're not used to (with the exception of Zolaesque naturalism)?
- The shifting perspective, from "one" to "Rita" to "we" (elided in the English translation) – a collective mentality?
- Manfred's parents – seen by some as the most rounded, developed characters in the book, by others as a stereotype of the bourgeoisie.
- Manfred and Rita's situation vis-à-vis his parents – living and sleeping in their home, but causing a minor domestic scandal by holding hands under the diningroom table. An interesting discussion of the boyfriend/girlfriend/parents relationship in different cultures.
- The faulty English translation (Emma-Jane supplied alternative translations of passages cited in the article, which seemed reassuringly closer to the French translation).
Phoebe
Re: "The shifting perspective, from "one" to "Rita" to "we" (elided in the English translation) - a collective mentality?"
ReplyDeleteIt's true, during our session this topic was not largely discussed, although it is and important notion in the book and might be a central key to its understanding.
A man like Meternagel invested more than just extensive work hours in the construction of the country. He's not doing it for personal pleasure but in believe to bring his part in the construction of a better world - and a different country. Convictions and commitment were central driver of this process - and there were those more committed to the cause and ideals than others. It is not about taking sides, it is about the need to define one's own position in life.
Rita, in front of new challenges in her life, is still constructing her personal convictions, and I understand the change of perspectives in the text as an expression of her quest. On the one hand she encounters and understands the resentments of Manfred and his struggle to believe in the official ideals despite his disappointing experiences. And on the other hand her own experience in the plant provides her with an insight about the possibilities of achievement, provided good will and conviction are at work. The official "we" discourse corresponds much more to her own ideals than Manfred's misery.
So, how much one gets lost in society's common places? How much of "I" one can find in the "we"?
Since the impact of translations on the understanding of a text is mentioned, here an alternative translation proposal for a few extractions.
ReplyDeleteAccess to the document:
https://docs.google.com/open?id=0BwZGLPNcOwmtcGdGdVg1VWlXMnM
The subtil change of meaning is very impressive, I think...