The Readers Review: Literature from 1714 to 1910 discussion

Here we have a section that mostly holds together.

What kind of person is Marianne? What did you think of her and Gosta’s relationship?

What do you think Marianne heard about Gosta at the end of this section?

Why do you think the bear was included in the book?

Do you like the author’s writing style so far (taking translation into account)?

This book is so beautifully written, and now that I understand the structure better, I am able to enjoy each story as a separate but lightly connected part of the whole book. The love affair between Marianne and Gosta is so sad. That he still loves her after her disfigurement from smallpox is indicative of his depths; but that he is so easily driven away by Marianne’s reflects an inability to persevere under less-than-perfect circumstances. What would have happened if he had been more patient with the situation of her recuperation, biding his time while she recovered both physical health and emotional equilibrium? There is a great deal to be understood about the stories: how does the bear story fit into the whole; will the Majoress regain her home and position along with the respect of the cavaliers? One thing that truly puzzles me is that Gosta’s drinking problem isn’t really a part of these chapters. The initial chapters made clear that he was an alcoholic who lost his position in life because of uncontrolled drinking. In this section, while it’s clear that he and the other cavaliers drink, but Gosta does not appear to be out of control or incapacitated by drink.

Yes, that's true. His alcoholism isn't really mentioned here, but his chronic irresponsibility is still an issue.

That is a good point. Gösta seems much more in control of his life than before. Maybe being a vicar was not his calling after all.

I have just finished this section, could not get to the last chapter since last Sunday night.

Selma Lagerlöf's language is very poetic and in some ways also very metaphorical.

I often had trouble deciphering when Lagerlof was narrating the story, relating a separate fairy tale, or using a metaphor.

Lori wrote: "I often had trouble deciphering when Lagerlof was narrating the story, relating a separate fairy tale, or using a metaphor."

That fluidity of the storytelling gives the story an odd fairly tale and fantasy feel. So, appropriately, I find it oddly entertaining. But the narrative style and fairy tale aspects do keep me at a distance from these characters, who are more like fantasy than historically realistic characters.

Brian E wrote: "That fluidity of the storytelling gives the story an odd fairly tale and fantasy feel. So, appropriately, I find it oddly entertaining. But the narrative style and fairy tale aspects do keep me at a distance from these characters, who are more like fantasy than historically realistic characters"

Yes, that's exactly it. I can see why she won the Nobel Prize, as the writing is beautiful and it figuratively immerses the reader in the countryside of that time. But it is hard to connect with the main story.