Ordinary Times Bookclub: Jacob’s Room
here.)
(This is a guest post, and guest book club, by our very own DRS. Read our kickoff postIn Jacob’s Room there seems to be little room for Jacob.
There is lots of room for memories even though few seem to be of Jacob at this point. Jacob acts more as a catalyst for other people’s memories – his tutor as the unsuccessful suitor of his mother rather than as a part of his own educational youth. We read about his father, who Jacob could have had little memory of. We certainly know little of Jacob’s inner life but read a great deal of what other people think of him – such as Mrs. Norman who receives named credit for what was a brief shared trip by rail to Cambridge. So on the surface, Jacob appears to be less than the title character in his own novel.
But underneath, like a subterranean current, Jacob is omnipresent.
He’s there in the very first sentence, in some nomenclatural foreshadowing: “’So of course’, wrote Betty Flanders…” Flanders. As in Flanders Fields where poppies grow, between the crosses row on row. As in a major theatre of the Great War with its great populations of the dead.
He’s also present in the relentless imagery of death and destruction throughout these first five chapters. Examples like the following abound:
“A terrifying volley of pistol-shots rings out—cracks sharply; ripples spread—silence laps smooth over sound. A tree—a tree has fallen, a sort of death in the forest. After that, the wind in the trees sounds melancholy.”
“His slippers were incredibly shabby, like boats burnt to the water’s rim.” (My personal favourite)
And then this casual, almost throw-away sentence:
“Behind the grey walls sat so many young men, some undoubtedly reading, magazines, shilling shockers, no doubt; legs, perhaps, over the arms of chairs; smoking; sprawling over tables, and writing while their heads went round in a circle as the pen moved—simple young men, these, who would—but there is no need to think of them grown old…”
No, indeed: for these young men are of the generation destined to die young.
This novel is ostensibly biographical: the story of Jacob Flanders as he proceeds through the major milestones of his life. But the perspective is skewed. We never hear Jacob utter a full thought rather than abrupt first or last sentences or incomplete exclamations. Because we are watching Jacob move through his life like a series of rooms that open one after another, leading towards some ending that is coming closer than expected.
Virginia Woolf is not really writing about Jacob’s life – she’s painting it.
I like that analogy–that Woolf is painting rather than writing this novel. Impressionistic painting at that. While reading the first few chapters, I noticed her constant mention of colors, particularly purple, yellow, and grey. I’m sure it must mean something although I haven’t quite figured out what.
I also noticed a theme from another Woolf theme that I remember from Waves: how little we actually know about other people. From a distance, it’s man in a raincoat or woman in a red dress. From up closer, it’s Bob or Emily. But what we know of most people are the characteristics we assign to them. We’re all alone with our deepest thoughts and our deepest selves.
And so it makes sense that Jacob is more a cypher than a fleshed-out character, that what we see and know of him are what others tell us and that we get few inklings of who he really is. At least not in the first five chapters.Report
Perhaps because we’re getting intimations of who he was. Woolf’s descriptions don’t make a lot of sense if this is a traditional novel that is moving from the present into the future. But JR is a novel of memory where different points of view are looking backwards. It doesn’t matter what Jacob went on to say in his discussions with Bonamy in his university room; what matters is that certain people remember how he used to use the same opening words when he was in a discussion. It’s the fragments of memory piled up one on top of another.Report
When I opened my copy again, I discovered that I had added, almost as a subtitle, “A BIOGRAPHY IN ABSENTIA” on the title page, presumably toward the end of my first reading. I don’t remember whether that was my phrase or my professor’s, however.
A few hours ago, before I’d read this post, I had a very similar thought to Michelle’s, that this feels a lot like Woolf is applying ideas of Modernist/Impressionist painting to her prose. But I wonder whether there isn’t also the trace of the influence of early cinema on it, in the way it will set a scene, then jump to a small moment of “narrative” action/interaction, then cut to an entirely new scene.
There are some critics who point out that Woolf began work on Jacob’s Room while she was setting the type for the Hogarth Press edition to The Waste Land. The general theory is that this might have influenced, somehow, the choppiness (visual and narrative) of this novel. However, I wonder whether the connection isn’t in the way time is perceived: in each, past, present, and future impinge on one another and won’t stay put, while the narrator (and reader) sit at a kind of remove from that competition able to see all these eras simultaneously. (Is her waste land Flanders Field then?)Report