• Welcome to BookAndReader!

    We LOVE books and hope you'll join us in sharing your favorites and experiences along with your love of reading with our community. Registering for our site is free and easy, just CLICK HERE!

    Already a member and forgot your password? Click here.

Jeanette Winterson

lenny nero

New Member
Anybody here read her stuff? The Passion is one of my favorite books! Written on the Body is another great one. Her non-linear and meandering narratives can take a little getting used to but I think she's great. She's not as popular in the States as she is overseas.
 
i read written on the body for my book club and was pleasantly surprised. the part in the middle about body parts (it's not what it sounds, it's like a poetic meditation of her lover's body, with medical terminology) caught me a little off guard though-- i think i would have really enjoyed tham as stand-alone poems. in the middle of a novel it put me off a little. overall though i enjoyed the novel and will be re-reading it when i get the urge.
 
It runs in my mind that I read something called Sexing the Cherry by her. (I'm not sure 'cause I'm still in the aftermath of moving and haven't unpacked all my books.) At any rate, I liked the book, for the most part. There were some very beautiful and clever passages. However, I was put off, a little, by what I perceived to be "axe-grinding" on her part (that is, where making ideological or political points interfered with the story).
 
actually, in "written on the body" her axe-grinding paid off, imho.

slight spoiler: if you want to read the book then don't read this. however, it's a stylistic point (not plot) and it's given away in every single essay/review on this novel. written on the body never reveals the narrator's gender. apparently she became known as a "lesbian writer" and wanted to get away from that. i was intrigued by my own inability to just let go of gender and stop trying to "figure out" if it was a man or woman. i consider myself fairly liberal and open-minded yet i kept looking for 'evidence' one way or the other. nonetheless i didn't find it detracted from the novel at all. from an ideological point of view, i found it beneficial, as it really doesn't matter what gender the narrator is: we just like to categorize things so we can "understand" them.
 
Thanks for the info - I'll probably read more of her books down the road.
I should add that I didn't really care about the gender of either the author or the narrator, I just don't much care for authors grinding their own political/ideological axes in their fiction - without regard to what those axes might be.
I also dislike when authors mention particular pieces of music in their fiction because (it seems to me) such instances smack of the author trying to impress the reader with his/her sophistication in a sort of cultural shorthand.
Like I said, I did find much of her writing very lyrical and affecting.
 
I certainly can't cite chapter and verse, so to speak, because I read the book many years ago. I do remember, though, that various passages seemed to me to be needlessly hostile towards men in ways that didn't necessarily do anything to advance the story or other themes in the book.
I'm perfectly willing to admit that that judgment may be unfair - after all, I've only read that one book.
By the same token, though, I also remember that the best passages in that book reminded me of the best bits in Calvino's Invisible Cities - expressing in unique ways a very sophisticated and world-weary melancholy over the nature of things.
 
hm. thanks for answering, even if it's only a vague recollection. i'm definitely going to read more of her stuff eventually. however, like many book-geeks, i have shelves of books i'm intending to read. :rolleyes:
 
Her latest, Lighthousekeeping, comes out here in April. It's been out for awhile overseas. I'm looking forward to it.
 
i noticed yesterday that i put "written on the body" on my books-to-keep-and-read-over-and-over shelf. i guess that means i have to check out her next one. :rolleyes: thanks for the heads up.
 
funes said:
Thanks for the info - I'll probably read more of her books down the road.
I should add that I didn't really care about the gender of either the author or the narrator, I just don't much care for authors grinding their own political/ideological axes in their fiction - without regard to what those axes might be.
I also dislike when authors mention particular pieces of music in their fiction because (it seems to me) such instances smack of the author trying to impress the reader with his/her sophistication in a sort of cultural shorthand.
Like I said, I did find much of her writing very lyrical and affecting.

I'm pretty much the same way :) I don't like it when authors have an "agenda" and gratuitously pursue it within the novel. It's OK if it's subtle, but not as you say "axe grinding". That is one reason I have yet to read anything by Sheri S. Tepper! Her blatant feminist agenda would irritate me.
 
Yeah. At the very least, I think that an author should put such spoutings in the mouths of one of their characters. And, maybe that's why it seemed so jarring in Winterson's book. Like I said, I seem to remember most of the book being quite good.
And, again, as I said, it isn't about feminism, per se, but any kind of gratuitous ideological ranting.
 
My not-so-brief digest of Winterson's books goes something like this (might have to split this into two posts):

Oranges are not the only fruit (1985). The book for which she is semi-famous and which everyone seems to be able to get along with. It's warm and funny and likeable and slightly original (for the stuff about the Orange demon and fantasy-fairytale stuff interwoven with trouble at t'mill northern grimness). It bashes religion and talks up what commentators call girl-on-girl action. She does however have this terrible revisionist attitude and speaks now of Oranges as having "a new way with language" and "a spiral narrative" which is pure bollocks. It's just a nice, thoughtful but not especially challenging read.

Boating for Beginners (1985). In my reference earlier to her first four novels, I am not including this illustrated novella which she denies having disowned but which does significantly appear segregated from her other stuff on the "Also by this author" page. Everything else comes under "Fiction" but this is a "Comic Book" apparently. In another bit of Wildean paradoxy, she once said that Boating for Beginners "is worth reading but wasn't worth writing." I haven't read it so we will have to take her word on that.

The Passion (1986). A sort of transitional novel, still with a pretty linear narrative but more experimental than Oranges. It is divided in four parts and is set in and around the Napoleonic wars and in Venice. The two main characters are a soldier and a web-footed boatwoman, who eventually fall in love. Lots of fantastic writing on doomed love and very very quotable. It also saw the start of her tendency to reuse phrases from book to book to give the (largely false) impression of a single unified body of work throughout her fiction. "What you risk reveals what you value" was the big one from this book.

Sexing the Cherry (1989). Undoubtedly her first fully-fledged work of brilliance. A tiny wee thing (140 pages) where form perfectly matches subject, Sexing the Cherry also begins JW's still-extant obsession with time. It mainly concerns a boy called Jordan and his adoptive mother, the Dog Woman, who live in England during the Civil War. Some excellent stuff about the beheading of Charles I and extremely funny scenes of torture and sexual deviance. Also a kind of twist near the end, or surprise anyway. The voice is the first appearance of Winterson in full bloom - authoritative, poetic, occasionally hectoring (that occasional would become frequent in the later books), and with that knack - think Amis in The Information - of building up the images and ideas to deliver them all back to you in a coup de grace at the end:

Jeanette Winterson said:
As I drew my ship out of London I knew I would never go there again. For a time I felt only sadness, and then, for no reason, I was filled with hope. The future lies ahead like a glittering city, but like the cities of the desert disappears when approached. In certain lights it is easy to see the towers and the domes, even the people going to and fro. We speak of it with longing and with love. The future. But the city is a fake. The future and the present and the past exist only in our minds, and from a distance the borders of each shrink and fade like the borders of hostile countries seen from a floating city in the sky. The river runs from one country to another without stopping. And even the most solid of things and the most real, the best-loved and the well-known, are only hand-shadows on the wall. Empty space and points of light.

Written on the Body (1992). This is the first of her books dedicated "To Peggy Reynolds with love" and by coincidence marks the transformation for the topic of love in JW books from being treated as a disastrous mistake to "mankind's greatest achievement." Funny that. Also it sees the first appearance of the universal beloved in Jeanette Winterson books, a pale-skinned redhead ("like a bonfire someone has kicked over") - er, a bit like Peggy Reynolds, in fact! Written on the Body is a love story, slightly over-earnest in places but you can open it at any page and wallow in the language:

Love demands expression. It will not stay still, stay silent, be good, be modest, be seen and not heard, no. It will break out in tongues of praise, the high note that smashes the glass and spills the liquid. It is no conservationist love. It is a big game hunter and you are the game. A curse on this game. How can you stick at a game when the rules keep changing? I shall call myself Alice and play croquet with the flamingoes. In Wonderland everyone cheats and love is Wonderland isn't it?

Unfortunately it also saw the beginning of the backlash against her in the press, partly because of its over-earnestness but mostly because when it was published Winterson chose it as her book of the year, and just to clear up any doubts, selected herself in a Sunday Times poll for the greatest writer in the English language.

Art & Lies (1994). Absolutely universally vilified on publication. It took me four goes to love it but eventually - dammit - I did. It's a deliberately obtuse book, with three narrators called (she does ask for it, really) Handel, Picasso and Sappho (any resemblance etc. etc.). The theme this time is "How shall I live?" and with their respective roles as socially admired doctor "with musical hands", rebellious student painter and lesbian poet, Handel Picasso and Sappho try to tell us how to live. Again the beauty of the language is the thing that will keep you going, if anything does. Not for the faint-hearted but absolutely worth persisting with. A passage like this, from the end of the book, shows her strengths and weaknesses together. The beauty is in the rhythm and precision of the language (even if she puts in needless commas to remind the untrustworthy reader where to pause), the weakness in the unintentionally amusing rhetoric ("Or did they look in?") - oh, and the fact that after this last page, the novel turns instead to music and gives us ten pages from the score of Strauss's Der Rosenkavalier:

From the cliff-head, the two women standing together, looked out. Or did they look in? Held in the frame of light, was not the world, nor its likeness, but a strange equivalence, where what was thought to be known was re-cast, and where what was unknown began to be revealed, and where what could not be known, kept its mystery but lost its terror.

All this they saw and the sea in gold leaf and the purple and pearl of the cliffs.

It was not too late.

Gut Symmetries (1997). The beginning of the real problems with her books, at least in my view (others would start further back). A lot of it seems to be rehashings of earlier themes about time, science, love triangles, how to live and why, etc. etc. Even the writing takes off less frequently than before. She does herself no favours by implicitly comparing Gut Symmetries, in the first sentence of chapter one, with not one but two literary classics ("It began on a boat, like The Tempest, like Moby Dick"). Too often it seems self-indulgent, getting in the way of the occasional soaring passage:

My husband has started an affair. Cherchez la femme. Where is she?

Ransack the bedroom. The master bedroom well named. In a rip of pillow and sheet I shall tear her stigmata off the mattress. Is that her imprint, faint but discernible? My radioactive hands will sense her. Whatever bits of hair and flesh she has left behind I will find and crucible her.

Give me a pot and let me turn cannibal. I will feast on her with greater delight than he. If she is his titbit then I will gourmet her. Come here and discover what it is to be spiced, racked and savoured. I will eat her slowly to make her last longer. Whatever he has done I will do. Did he eat her? Then so will I. And spit her out.
 
Then we come to The Powerbook (2000), in my opinion a more or less complete stinker. It seemed to me to be terribly inconsequential. A few stories intertwined here and there, which in earlier books like Sexing the Cherry or Art & Lies she has put to the service of a bigger story, but here they just seem to say the same things (literally) over and over again. Only the impossible is worth the effort. There is no love that does not pierce the hands and feet. And so on.

The plot, such as it is, yet again once more settles on the love triangle, as it did in Written on the Body and Gut Symmetries. It's true of course that all writers retread the same ground throughout their careers (she acknowledges it in one dialogue "A story I am writing." "What is it about?" "Boundaries. Desire." "What are your other books about?" "Boundaries. Desire." "Can't you write about something else?" "No.") but these seem more like different drafts for the same book rather than the same themes approached from different angles and ages.

Curiously, while Winterson raves (rightly) in essays and interviews about imagination being the most important thing for a writer, she lacks it in some important respects. While no-one can deny - and I have often had cause to celebrate - her fictional flights of fancy, she does have a difficulty, to the extent almost of disability, in imagining different characters. All her heroes are Jeanette - the feisty, the orphaned, the self-made woman, most of all the lover - and secondary characters are either her lovers (who are always, as I mentioned before, red-haired, like her real-life lover Peggy Reynolds) or the Philistines, which includes parents, cuckolds, businessmen, tourists ("So why am I not a tourist? A tourist could be anywhere. The place doesn't matter. It's just another TV channel."), and pretty much everyone else. Her antipathy towards the common herd is really quite astonishing in The Powerbook:

...day-trippers from Sorrento, on package-holiday outings, clog up the smooth flow of money and goods from trader to shopper. The beautiful ageless women and their slightly sinister iron-haired men have to compete at the luxury windows with red legs and bad haircuts, as the migrant shorts population wonders out loud how much everything costs before moving on to another ice cream.

We can only assume she must have had her camera stolen in Capri once. All this self-righteousness, while present to an extent in Art & Lies and Gut Symmetries, really rankles here, perhaps because for the first time it's simply not shrouded in swathes of beautiful writing. There is the odd great phrase here and there - car seats "battered like prizefighters" - but not the paragraphs and pages of swoonsome prose that I have always had the urge to quote endlessly from her other books.

Lighthousekeeping (2004): If ever a book warranted the over-used (and usually optimistic) critical phrase "a return to form," Lighthousekeeping is it. After the brilliant but dense and closed Art & Lies (of which Winterson now says "It was written at a time when I was looking inwards, not outwards ... sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't"), the patchy Gut Symmetries and the (in my view) atrocious The PowerBook, Lighthousekeeping - supposedly the beginning of a new cycle in her writing - is a breath of sea air.

As a new cycle in her writing (she says her first seven novels were a complete cycle in themselves), it doesn't half look a lot like the old one. But this is to be expected: all writers revisit their old turf throughout their lives: as Martin Amis said when pre-empting such criticisms of Yellow Dog, "the perspective is like a shadow moving across a lawn." So Lighthousekeeping retains Winterson's abiding interest in love ("the greatest human achievement"), storytelling ("Trust me. I'm telling you stories"), the multiplicity of history, parentless children and boundaries of desire, but puts them in the service of something lighter and brighter than we have seen from her probably since Sexing the Cherry.

They say you can tell something of a person's life by observing their body. This is certainly true of my dog. My dog has back legs shorter than his front legs, on account of always digging in at one end, and always scrambling up at the other. On ground level he walks with a kind of bounce that adds to his cheerfulness. He doesn't know that other dogs' legs are the same length all the way round. If he thinks at all, he thinks every dog is like him, and so he suffers none of the morbid introspection of the human race, which notes every curve from the norm with fear or punishment.

The story is narrated, as you can see from the extract in my first post above, by Silver. Silver's gender remains undeclared through most of the book, as a ten-year-old child, which I thought was an echo of Written on the Body where Winterson did the same thing, although I have never been able to read the narrator there as anything other than a woman, and a Jeanette-shaped woman at that. Anyway towards the end we discover that Silver when fully grown wears a bra, so we can - probably - put paid to that theory. Silver is orphaned when her mother, roped to her to climb the slope to their home, falls:

The wind was strong enough to blow the fins off a fish. It was Shrove Tuesday, and we had been out to buy flour and eggs to make pancakes. At one time we kept our own hens, but the eggs rolled away, and we had the only hens in the world who had to hang on by their beaks as they tried to lay.

I was excited that day, because tossing pancakes was something you could do really well in our house - the steep slope under the oven turned the ritual of loosening and tossing into a kind of jazz. My mother danced while she cooked because she said it helped her to keep her balance.

Up she went, carrying the shopping, and pulling me behind her like an after-thought. Then some new thought must have clouded her mind, because she suddenly stopped and half-turned, and in that moment the wind blew like a shriek, and her own shriek was lost as she slipped.

In a minute she had dropped past me, and I was hanging on to one of our spiny shrubs - escallonia, I think it was, a salty shrub that could withstand the sea and the blast. I could feel its roots slowly lifting like a grave opening. I kicked the toes of my shoes into the sandy bank, but the ground wouldn't give. We were both going to fall, falling away from the cliff face to a blacked-out world.

I couldn't hang on any longer. My fingers were bleeding. Then, as I closed my eyes, ready to drop and drop, all the weight behind me seemed to lift. The bush stopped moving. I pulled myself up on it and scrambled behind it.

I looked down.

My mother had gone. The rope was idling against the rock. I pulled it towards me over my arm, shouting, 'Mummy! Mummy!'

The rope came faster and faster, burning the top of my wrist as I coiled it next to me. Then the double buckle came. Then the harness. She had undone the harness to save me.

Ten years before I had pitched through space to find the channel of her body and come to earth. Now she had pitched through her own space, and I couldn't follow her.

She was gone.

And so Silver ends up, via the obligatory narky old maid character, living with Pew, keeper of the Cape Wrath lighthouse. Pew, of course, is blind, and may or may not have lived for hundreds of years. He keeps Silver entertained by telling her stories, mostly of the 19th century clergyman Babel Dark (no shortage of symbolic names here, no sir), who visited Cape Wrath and knew Robert Louis Stevenson and betrayed his wife with a scarlet (literally; the old Winterson obsession with redheads is back too) woman. The lighthouse is a richly suggestive symbol itself of course: "a known point in the darkness", part of "a string of lights" on "the coasts and outcrops of this treacherous ocean."

But for all its open-to-interpretation symbolism, Lighthousekeeping, like most of Winterson's books, doesn't really leave you in any doubt about where the author is coming from. She still values love over all else:

But today, when the sun is everywhere, and everything solid is nothing but its own shadow, I know that the real things in life, the things I remember, the things I turn over in my hands, are not houses, bank accounts, prizes or promotions. What I remember is love - all love - love of this dirt road, the sunrise, a day by the river, the stranger I met in a café.

But what is missing in Lighthousekeeping is the bitterness and ranting - one might almost say raving - against consumerism, tourists, heterosexual marriage, other people, which increasingly marred everything from Art & Lies onward. It seems then that Winterson has, miraculously, found a way to express - and boy can she express; only now when looking up these quotes I have been diverted and diverted again by endless brilliant phrases among the pages - her passion for the life she loves without turning it into an attack on Everything Else. Where before she could be a marauding mob brandishing torches of naked flames, burning things down (albeit asking questions at the same time): now she is a kindly light, still bright and powerful enough to be seen for miles but under control, a known point in the darkness of so much contemporary fiction.
 
Yeah, thanks.
I think I will, at some point, read more of her books.
Looking over your list, I must have read The Passion. I couldn't remember, and didn't have all of my books unpacked after the move (and still don't).
 
I have only read one of Wintersons novels and that was Written on the Body and I must say that I really enjoyed it. I liked the idea that the main character had no gender, and by his/her actions the gender could have been argued both ways. I found it interesting not to have a gendered specific voice and as I read it I kept jumping from a male dominant voice to a female dominant voice.
 
Just finished Lighthousekeeping. It was, indeed, a return to form. Her best since Written on the Body. Highly recommended!
 
Back
Top