After more than two weeks of struggling I've managed to read The Remains of the Day by Kazuo Ishiguro. In accordance with the somewhat prophetic (or prescriptive?) opinion of my blogger idol* the book turned out to be something of a bore (especially the first half of it).
In a nutshell, the story is about an aging butler called Mr. Stevens (I wonder if we ever get to know his first name) and his recollections of the past. Stevens is now working for the American Mr Farraday as part of the package of the famous Darlington Hall. The scene is set after World War II, in the fifties, I guess. Urged by his new employer and the possibility of meeting a co-worker from the past, Miss Kenton (now Mrs Benn), Stevens leaves for an excursion to the country. Having lots of time on his hands, a thing that he hasn't experienced before, he keeps wondering about his past, particularly the period between WWI and WWII.
What is extremely annoying in the book is this self-assured first person singular, often appearing in the disguise of modesty. For example, there are lots of parts with introductions such as "I don't want to sound conceited", continuing with something to the effect of "I believe the way I behaved then was just splendid." Dignity is a re-occurring theme for his reflections, as well as the issue of being a great butler. One particularly cruel part is the recollection of the day his father died. As it happened, there was some important meeting of international significance taking place at Darlington Hall then, and naturally Stevens was quite busy making sure everything was in order. As the day proceeded, Miss Kenton, the housekeeper called several times to inform him about his father's state, and if I'm right, he did visit his father for a few minutes, but the general impression we get is that he took his work first. And there is a scene when Miss Kenton informs him of his father's death, and he cannot even go see him at that moment, so he asks Miss Kenton to close his father's eyelids. And when he enters the drawing room or I don't know where the meeting is going on, he is asked several times if he's all right, and he always answers that he is; then we learn that tears are rolling down on his cheeks. And all this sounds as if those tears were falling inspite of him, as if on a stone face. And most annoyingly, he finishes the recollection of that day so that at the end he felt triumphant over his managing through the day. Come on, triumphant? When your only father has just died? Why carry on, why drown yourself, why refuse to be human?
Another crucial theme of the book is the relationship between Mr Stevens and Miss Kenton. To my understanding Miss Kenton represents femininity, I mean the way a woman behaves. Like an Anglo-Saxon Eve, she comes up with ideas as to decorate Stevens's room with flowers to make it friendlier. And of course, from Stevens's point of view it seems superfluous or even intrusive. Another sharp contrast is the way Miss Kenton wears his heart on her sleeve, compared to the always composed (or should I say pretentious) Mr Stevens. For me it is she who makes the book bearable; though I cannot remain calm reading the butler's treatment of her.
What is most annoying in this book is that through the first person singular you have to identify with someone so annoying. And the reason he is so annoying is that he screws his life, or the way I've read it in a review, he is blind to what we readers see. And I want to shake him or hit him, or shout at his face, or do anything that might get him out of this blindness.
When I saw the movie I was about ten years younger, in addition, we watched it in English, so I don't remember (and probably didn't understand) much, but I remember the main characters being played by Anthony Hopkins and Emma Thompson, and both were quite credible for me. And we also had to write some sort of paper on it, and I remember it really moved me, and the whole movie had a gloomy atmosphere (without the accompanying annoyance generated by the book).
*a.k.a Little Miss Creative
P.S. And one more thing which really irritated me was that his new, American employer habitually jokes, and being a devoted employee, Stevens actually starts practicing bantering. That is, having finished his duties of the day, he strives to come up with five-six funny comments on the events of the day, my gosh.

I like the film adaptation of this novel so much that I re-watched it a couple of months ago. Sir Anthony plays wonderfully and makes the story realistic.
ReplyDeleteRegrettably, I don’t exactly remember what the different analyses said about the behaviour of Mr Stevens, but I think he does change by the end of the novel/film. In retrospect, he realises that his former employer’s deeds had been wrong, and he becomes aware of his feelings towards Miss Kenton. Of course, it is too late for him to change, and that is why he banters and focuses on the remains of his days/career.
I think Mr Stevens is the epitome of a butler. Or at least this is how I, stereotypically, imagine a butler.
I agree with you that he's the epitome of a butler, but in the process of becoming one he gradually ceases to be a human being. And that is something that no profession is worth.
ReplyDeleteBy the way, do you happen to have the film cause I would gladly watch it again, especially as the book is a fresh experience for me.
I agree with every word you wrote. I was so so annoyed with Stevens all the way through while reading the book. It felt like forever to get through the novel, and I kept wanting to facepalm Stevens for being so bloody *British* and such a perfectionist butler who could never ever step out of his character/uniform and act like a normal human being.
ReplyDeleteI did download the film before reading the novel, but then I deleted it without watching, because I was so annoyed when finishing the book. I just could not take another two hours of this story & this character.
ReplyDeleteI still don't get it why the book is thought to be a classic or why it has to be taught at university.
(Well, it's probably because of the somewhat perfect and well-rounded character of Stevens and all of his mannerism, both oral and acting-wise. Still, I don't get it. )
There are lots of things worthy of the question why they should be taught at university, especially our dear ex-university.
ReplyDelete