Does It Really Matter?****Spoiler*****


REPLIES - POST REPLY - THE LIBRARY - FAQ - HOME - Q

Posted by Cassia on November 01, 1997 at 15:53:57:


In response to Me too, written by Hil on November 01, 1997 at 15:07:36


I've grown to believe that this kind of dispute is the reason that Byatt left thing unclear. There is textual evidence for both sides and that is the point that Byatt is making. We interpret things from our own point of view. Clever of her, really.


Like Maud and Roland, we can't truly know the entire story. The first time I read PossessionI was convinced that Blanche made the whole thing up, that her love wasn't returned in kind. Later, I came to think just the opposite. Byatt purposely chose the name Christabel to muddy the waters even more. She wants us to pour over the 'evidence' in the text, sift again and again and then not rely on the pat, easy answers that we have grown used to. She may be saying that the way we sort things, our categories, don't matter when it comes to the past because we can never really know. And what gives us the right to know when it was all between the two of them?


So the question rises: Are we all too post-Freudian to able to accept the idea that no matter what the relationship was, it had no bearing on Christabel's work (Blanche was not Christabel's muse although Christabel seemed to be Blanche's) or how she chose to act in this most unequal relationship.




REPLIES:




Posting followups to old messages is disabled; instead go to the main index and post a new message which mentions this one.


- Republic of Pemberley -
Home | Q | Jane Info