Welcome to the Aspects of Narrative Blog

I would like you to use this resource in the following ways:



You can read my posts;

Enter your own responses to questions that are displayed;

Ask questions of other bloggers and me;

Look at links and articles;

Upload your own thoghts, comments and posts;

Use the blog as a revision tool.



I think that this blog has huge potential, but it will only be of any use if there are regular contributors. Get blogging!



Mr. Denchfield

Wednesday, 31 March 2010

'Oh, yeah... I missed that bit.'

Forgotten who the beadsman is or why he's there? Wondering why Orlick tries to murder Pip? Can't for the life of you remember how 'La Belle Dame' is an allegory about the writing of poetry? Please add any questions that you have about any of the texts, no matter how daft, and my team of experts (you lot) will answer them.

6 comments:

  1. I have a query about chapter 13 in ‘Great Expectations’, when Joe goes with Pip to Satis House. I was wondering why Joe does not address Miss Havisham, but speaks only to Pip; clearly this demonstrates Joe’s lack of pretence (most of the other characters fawn around Miss Havisham, Sarah Pocket for instance), illustrates Pip’s embarrassment of Joe, and is humorous. Does Joe not speak to Miss Havisham, so he does not have to lie to Mrs. Joe in order to uphold the extravagant lie that Pip told her initially about Satis house? Or perhaps there is something more symbolically relevant about the fact that Joe chooses not to communicate with Miss Havisham, while Pip is entirely enticed and entrapped by the ‘dark and unhealthy house’, its inhabitants and their warped relationships.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I agree with your last point; perhaps Joe is such an honest and true character that such extravagance which does not give any character's joy, is beyond him. I mean to say that Joe is kept from a corrupting world, his kindness and almost childlike innocence, which was taken from Pip, is intact, making him the modle for which pip is able to base himself on later.
    (Also this foreshadows Pip's and Joe's encounter later in the novel. )

    ReplyDelete
  3. Interesting thoughts. I think that, fundamentally, Joe is seen as an archetypal working class character. He is aware of the social structure and his place within it but he finds the codes and conventions of class etiquette confusing. Therefore, I think that his addressing Pip is an improvised response which he believes may be the most socially appropriate thing to do in such an unfamiliar environment. As well as this, Dickens is clearly showing Joe's fear and confusion at arriving in a place like Satis House--whcih, as Pip's guardian, he would not want to be visibly obvious. I would also say that, from our point of view, the humour of this chapter is the most important thing. Dickens achieves this through the visual image of Joe repeatedly ignoring Miss H, the language that he uses and its apologetic tone, younger Pip's feelings of comradeship for Joe being challenged by what he realises is a socially uncomfortable exchange and older Pip's obvious affection for Joe.

    As always, with Dickens, the juxtaposition of the comic and the grotesque sit clearly side by side.

    Excellent question, Sara; great response Zoe. One further question, though: is Dickens' portrayal of Joe more sympathetic or patronising?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Just wondering what anyone has to say about how Dickens uses his narrator to show young Pip's fluctuating point of view towards Joe?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Good point. I think that it all stems from the realisation the split that occurs between them in chapter 2 when Pip deliberately lies to Joe in stealing the bread. From this point on, he can no longer see Joe as an equal.

    The meeting between the two of them and Miss Havisham in Chapter 12 (p99-102) is telling in that the older Pip acknowledges his utter embarrassment for the first time, whilst the younger Pip is still coming to terms with his divided loyalties.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Was just wondering what the Keats question was in January 2010, or do we not know?

    ReplyDelete