Alice Munro

[Jughead]

Just finished reading Runaway and it occurs to me that while there are many other good short story writer's out there, most others should read Alice and hang their heads in shame. Most novelists as well.

I foolishly started reading Bernard Schlink's book of short stories right after. I adored his novel The Reader and was looking forward to this book but after Runaway it is disappointing.

Anyone else read Runaway, if so, thoughts.

 

[Peder]

Just finished reading Runaway and it occurs to me that while there are many other good short story writer's out there, most others should read Alice and hang their heads in shame. Most novelists as well.

Anyone else read Runaway, if so, thoughts.

Jughead,
Yes, I read Runaway about a year ago and I agree entirely with your high praise. Although I don't read short stories much, I must also add that I have read Andre Dubus and also been very impressed by him.
Peder

 

[Ell]

Runaway is in my top 10 list for 2005.

I've been a fan of Munro's short stories for some time now and have most of her collections. Jughead, have you read anything else by her? Runaway struck a deep emotional chord with me - which is usually the case with Munro.

When I read Munro, I feel like we're on the same wavelength and there's no searching for common ground. I'm amazed at how she evokes the tone and setting of each story in so few words.

And Peder, I've not forgotten to check out Dubus.

 

[Peder]

Rotflol!

Runaway is in my top 10 list for 2005.

I've been a fan of Munro's short stories for some time now and have most of her collections. Jughead, have you read anything else by her? Runaway struck a deep emotional chord with me - which is usually the case with Munro.

When I read Munro, I feel like we're on the same wavelength and there's no searching for common ground. I'm amazed at how she evokes the tone and setting of each story in so few words.

And Peder, I've not forgotten to check out Dubus.

Ell, Sorry, I didn't want to hijack the forum. He'll be there waiting when you are ready. Now, I promise, no more Dubus.

re Munro, I get completely absorbed in the clarity of her individual sentences, even as her theme unfolds much more slowly. And at the time I was doing quite a bit of traveling by train. The book was better. In the title story, I remember being somewhat stunned at the ending, but also somewhat surprised that there was disagreement in the discussion about what it meant. Dunno.

Peder

 

[Ell]

Ell, Sorry, I didn't want to hijack the forum. He'll be there waiting when you are ready. Now, I promise, no more Dubus.

Didn't think of it as hijacking. It was a good reminder (I need them from time to time).

re Munro, . . . In the title story, I remember being somewhat stunned at the ending, but also somewhat surprised that there was disagreement in the discussion about what it meant. Dunno.

Now, you've got me intrigued. I need to go back and re-read it.

 

[Ell]

I just found this review of Alice Munro written by Jonathan Franzen that expresses much of my own feelings toward Munro's writing.

Peder, I re-read the title story and I'm not clear about what you mean by disagreement about the ending.

 

[Peder]

I just found this review of Alice Munro written by Jonathan Franzen that expresses much of my own feelings toward Munro's writing.

Peder, I re-read the title story and I'm not clear about what you mean by disagreement about the ending.

Ell
Re the review, yes, that is the review that tumbled me to buying the book in the first place. It was the first I had heard of her.
Re the ending, let me try one last time to find my copy, to get names/details right, and I'll be back with you. Maybe even a trip to bookstore to refresh my memory. /evil grin/
Peder

 

[StillILearn]

I just found this review of Alice Munro written by Jonathan Franzen that expresses much of my own feelings toward Munro's writing.

Peder, I re-read the title story and I'm not clear about what you mean by disagreement about the ending.

Thank you for this, Ell! I do so love Jonathan Franzen.

 

[novella]

About the ending to the title story, there are some questions left hanging.

Spoiler

It's implied, though not confirmed that the husband killed the goat. Assuming he did, we wonder why. I also wonder what the wife really thinks of that. She only learns of the goat's reappearance from the letter at the end, and then it apparently haunts her, as she wonders whether her husband is capable of killing the goat. And she must wonder why he did it. I can't understand why myself. Though it says somewhere that the goat would always be a reminder of the runaway incident, that doesn't seem a strong enough reason.

Also, there's some intimation in the beginning of the story that the goat's affections switched from the husband to the wife and that the husband's reaction was jealousy. Is he nutty enough to take this jealousy to murderous ends? Is the goat, then, symbolic of the attraction the wife has to something besides her husband? (Goats ARE often symbolic of randy sexuality.)

These questions didn't bother me at all. I like them to be unresolved and leave room for speculation. But I think this open-ended problem may be what Peder was referring to.

What do you think?

 

[Ell]

I didn't mind the unresolved issues either.

I think the goat is key to understanding the symbolism of this piece. The mystical qualities Munro gives Flora underline the importance of the goat as symbol and I believe there are a number of possibile interpretations. The sexual aspect is one.

Spoiler

Others I thought of: Clark killing the goat could be viewed in the Christian sense as a sacrifice to purify his relationship with Carla and let go of his plot to extort Sylvia - a chance to start anew. Or on a more sinsiter note, the goat's appearance/disappearance could be seen as a pact with the devil (the goat often seen as the devil in the occult) - everything improved (the weather, business, their relationship) after the goat incident. In either case, their lives changed for the better.

I'm not sure it matters whether Clark killed the goat or just chased it away. The result is the same. Carla believes Clark killed the goat, but tries to push it out of her mind because she is afraid of Clark's anger, yet happy that their lives have Improved. On the whole, it's better that she not analyze the situation too closely.

Novella, what did you think of the other stories?

.

 

[Peder]

Novella, Ell,
Thank you for clarifying in your discussion certain of the details that were not fresh in my mind. Still fresh, however, are my more ominous expectations for the open ends of the story.

Spoiler

As I read the story it revealed more and more, the genuine hallmarks of an abusive situation -- especially his loving affection at her return home. Maybe not so much physically, so far, but their relation certainly already seems emotionally abusive to me at times.
So, at the end it seems to me that the husband either killed Flora in a fit of anger, which is not good; or that he cold-bloodedly murdered Flora as an ominous warning to his wiife to never stray again, which is definitely not good. Carrying that one step further, I really think that in a situation exacty like that, there is a very good chance, amounting to almost certainty, that his wife is going to end up dead at his hands, like Flora, if she doesn't get out.

But, OMO.

Maybe I over-dramtize the situation, but it has the wrong kinds of earmarks for me in terms of what I have ever read about such situations in real-life.

Peder

 

[sanyuja]

Interesting discussion. I recently read the first two stories in the book. I have to admit, it took me some time to get used to Munro.

Regarding the ending:

Spoiler

I re-read the last couple of paragraphs to make sure I understood the story. I was expecting some kind of a logical conclusion to this story. I guess I am just too used to reading 'normal, straight-forward' stories, I should have known better. I too thought that Clark had killed Flora; he was too evil to shoo her away.

Coming to the why question, I remember a dialogue between Clark and Clara where he says he will kill her (or some other words to the same effect) if she ever tries to leave him again. This struck me as odd at that point of time. If you are talking to your loved one who tried to run away from you and if you don't want that person to do that again, you would say "If you go away, I will die" or something like that. But, this was completely in contrast to what I expected.

So, to prove to Carla that Clark was serious about this 'preposition', he killed Flora. The goat tried to run away and paid for it.