With Slow Man it seems as though Coetzee is returning to the questions of authenticity he raised in Elizabeth Costello, especially considering the fact that she herself appears in the text seemingly from out of nowhere. The mysteriousness of her arrival serves to put the reality of the narrative into question at this point, as prior to that the novel generally employs realism in the unfolding of its plot. The sudden turn towards metafictional intertextuality in a realist novel, combined with the way that Elizabeth is able to assert her will almost unimpeded, poses some rather obvious concerns about the authenticity of both realism and experience. What are we to make of a reality that reveals its own constructedness so readily? Elizabeth appears to have a kind of supreme awareness of Paul's existence, going well beyond his own knowledge at least, such that she comes to embody the illusory and rather circumstantial nature of self awareness . That she also represents the novel's own constructedness serves to establish this illusory self awareness as being the source of questions regarding the "truth" of one's reality as a whole.
This is compounded by the novel's ending, as the Jokic family pushes Paul to realize who he is by embracing his one-leggedness, in the hopes of allowing him to experience a more complete life. This "new Paul" though is somewhat of a cliche, "one of the quaint types who lend colour to the social fabric" (256), so that even in accentuating that which makes him unique he falls into a preconceived role rather than one chosen of his own accord. Though the scene ends on a positive note with Ljuba's joke connecting Paul to the novel's title, the novel itself seems to be suggesting a particularly bleak (surprise surprise) outlook on the prosepct of self-knowledge and understanding reality. Apparently neither of these goals is attainable, as complete self awareness depends on being aware of the "self" that others see in oneself, which in turn is the result of the signifiers one is saddled with in a reality governed by circumstance. The novel seemingly suggests humor as an anaesthetic for the anxiety caused b the awareness of one's incompleteness, but it is merely an anaesthetic, as Costellow's own trepidation when she smiles at the novel's close reveals ongoing fear of the uncertainty defining her own existence (263).
Hi Zach,
ReplyDeleteI too took notice of Costello’s complex role in the novel. When I was reading the novel, I was puzzled at her striking familiarity of Paul’s life. The “illusory awareness” and quest of “truth” you mention are apparent through Costello’s constant attempt to mastermind the already perplexed Paul. Costello, for instance, repeats multiple times, “You were sent to me, I was sent to you” (161). Through this statement, Costello exerts a form of mind manipulation. At one point, I thought Coetzee was once again playing with his readers and making Elizabeth Costello not only Paul’s unpredictable roommate, but more interesting to note, Paul’s inner-conscience. Elizabeth Costello knew a lot about Paul, probably even more than his closest companions. When Costello attempts to match Paul with Marianna, for example, it is as if she crawls into each of their minds. She speaks of Marianna as if she was her long term, know-it-all friend. Costello even claims, “Yes, she [Marianna] knows you. You and she are acquainted” (97). This is odd and once again brings up the point of “truth” and “reality” because before Paul ever mentioned anything about this strange woman he had seen at the hospital, Costello already knew her identity, name and even a detailed explanation about her blindness and life. How could she have made such a connection without first speaking to either of them and first asserting that her claims were factual if they were not even allowed to look at each other? Two explanations can derive from this. Either she was making the entire story up, or she really was a character that existed in Paul’s mind.
Costello’s overpowering knowledge also serves as a way to take full control of the story and its characters. Paul tells Costello, for instance, “You make up stories and bully us into playing the out for you. You should open up a puppet theater, or a zoo…Buy one, and put us in cages with our names on them” (117). She attempts to take control not only of the story she is constructing about Paul’s life, but the construction, as you mentioned, of the entire story, almost as if usurping Coetzee’s role and power over his writing.
Thank you for sharing!
Norma Perez
This is an interesting interpretation of Elizabeth Costello in Slow Man. I hadn't really considered her as a sort of embodiment of self awareness. I think you argue this quite clearly, but I might want to play the devil's advocate here for the sake of discussion. How can she, as Norma puts it, exist solely “in Paul's mind,” when she also has a sort of omniscient knowledge of the thoughts, history, et cetera, of all the other characters. There is no one that she doesn't know everything about. Furthermore, if she does represent self-awareness, then why would Paul deliberately reject her in the end? Perhaps this speaks to the, “the illusory and rather circumstantial nature of self awareness.” I would agree entirely that such self awareness is indeed illusory, since it seems that we can never know the entire truth about anything, especially ourselves, but I still think that we strive to figure it out. This makes me think that she cannot represent self awareness, because I don't think Paul would reject her so outright. Maybe he would though, as some people don't like to dive into the murky waters of their own psyche. Maybe I am just biased because I strive to be self aware.
ReplyDeleteMy first interpretation of the novel was that Costello represents God (as third-person omniscient narrators sometimes do), and that Paul's rejection of her was his rejection of God. But that is neither here nor there. Nevertheless, I appreciate your interpretation of Costello! Have a nice Thanksgiving!
I had many of the same ideas you presented in your blog. I, too, thought a lot about reality and truth in terms of Costello's random appearance in the novel. I also considered the "self awareness". However, I want to provide a different interpretation. Aside from what you have already discussed in your blog, I also considered the whole idea of imagining yourself into the being of another. I'm not sure if I'm far off with this. I may as well be because honestly I did see Costello as the author and agree with you on the manipulation of reality and truth. However, I tried to get myself to also look at the novel in a different way. I thought, maybe Costello isn't simply an author, perhaps she imagined herself into the being of Paul's life and that's what her random appearance in the novel suggests. Her character spoke a lot about being able to imagine yourself in the being of another person and writing stories in the prospective of someone else in "The Lives of Animals" and "Elizabeth Costello." I also recall her talking about seeing yourself in the being of the opposite sex. I may be pushing to far out on this, but I do think it does give for interesting reading. Maybe, her appearance isn't just a play on reality, which Coetzee seems to do a lot, but is also a reflection and comment on the previous arguement made in the other books about animal rights and seeing yourself in the being of another. Hopefully this isn't too crazy of an idea :)
ReplyDeletefrom Rolando-
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed your piece, especially your second paragraph, concentrating on Paul's character and what his "one-leggedness" signifies. Looking at this from a disabilities studies perspectives, there is a ton of discourse involving what is the self when ther is a change in their physical make-up. Instead of becoming a new person, Paul is becoming more self-aware. This is significant since in literature, there are a litter of stories that involve a a character who has suffered a incident like Paul but instead regain their status as "normal" or "able-bodied" (there is a term for this type of narrative, but it escapes me right now).
I think that Elizabeth Costello's role helps show what the able-bodied attitude expects from someone who is disabled, making his departure from her much more significant.
(I hate Elizabeth Costello)
I like your examination here of truth, authenticity and the self. I agree that this novel is a multilayered exploration of all of these concepts. Actually, when I was reading your post it made me think of Hegel’s Master-Slave Dialectic. Hegel says that there are two forms of self-consciousness that battle each other for the superior position (Master-Slave). There is the perception of self created by the individual and there is the perception of self created by how a person is perceived by others. When a person sees this other perception of himself, which is created outside himself (by the perception of others), he at first wants to kill this “other” to maintain his individuality. But, the individual perception of self must realize that this perception of self is partially based on others’ perceptions. If we “kill” it, we lose a part of ourselves. So, if this other public self is not killed, the two selves enter into a relationship with each other. The Master is the individual’s perception of self and the Slave is the self that interacts in the world. But, ironically, the public self, by making things and entering into relationships in the world then becomes the more powerful consciousness, thereby reversing the Master-Slave relationship. Eventually both realize they are in fact interdependent.
ReplyDeleteIn the case of Paul and Elizabeth, their battle for control of Paul’s self is a personification of Hegel’s ideology since as Coetzee writes, he represents both forms of self-consciousness. On the one hand, he controls the character’s actions and the ways in which people in the novel perceive the character. On the other hand, because the character is his own construction, the character also represents parts of his individual consciousness as well. The fact that Coetzee brings Elizabeth into the novel is his way of examining this entire way of thinking. By bringing her into the novel, Coetzee creates a kind of live representation of Hegel’s ideology.
I like, too, that you point out in your post the additional idea that true self awareness itself is also “illusory” and that “complete self awareness depends on being aware of the ‘self’ that others see in oneself,” which is impossible. This again complicates Coetzee’s examination of authorship and the self even more, which of course is his intention. Coetzee’s examination of the concept of self in Slow Man is one of my favorites in his works because of its multilayered depth. I’m glad you commented on it as well.
--Keli Rowley