Elegance of the Hedgehog ~ Muriel Barbery ~ Book Club Online ~ April 1st

[JoanP]

The Book Club Online is  the oldest  book club on the Internet, begun in 1996, open to everyone.  We offer cordial discussions of one book a month,  24/7 and  enjoy the company of readers from all over the world.  everyone is welcome to join in.

"Prickly and popular novel on class and culture" -     "Central to the book's appeal is the compelling voice of its main character, Renée Michel, a 54-year-old Paris apartment-building concierge who struggles to hide her self-taught erudition and cultivation from snobby, rich tenants. She disdains their élitist notions of class and social order, but she knows the residents would be outraged at discovering what a deep grasp the hired help has of art and learning. So Renée masks her intellect behind the persona expected of her lowly station." Time Magazine The second narrator in the book is the precocious 12 year old daughter of one of the tenants, who hides her intelligence  from a world she finds meaningless.  The two characters neatly mirror one another in a philosophical tale of contrasts which succeeds in resolving some issues of life and death.

Discussion Schedule: April 1-3 ~ Marx Preamble pgs.17-27 April 4-12 ~ Camellias ~  pgs.31-129 April 13-16 ~ On Grammar ~ pgs.133-170 April 22-26 ~ Paloma ~ pgs. 241-315 April 27 ~ My Camellias ~ pgs. 316-325 Final Thoughts

For Your Consideration
April 27 ~ My Camellias ~ pgs.316-325

1. Do you find yourself wishing that the book ended before the "My Camellias" chapter?  Did the preceding chapters prepare you for such an ending?

2.  How did the swings in mood and tone from scenes of comedy to moments of tragedy  affect your reaction to the novel?  Was it important or distracting to hear from the altenating narrators?

3.  Who are Renée's Camellias?  What new information was revealed in her final thoughts of each of them?  

4. Why does Renée believe that Manuela  will feel remorse for the dry cleaning incident?   And then, why did Manuela collapse with the words, "forgive me"  on her lips?  

4. What are Renée's final thoughts of Kakuro - and "what might have been"?  

5.  Why does Renée begin to cry at the thought of Paloma, the daughter she never had?  What does she wish for her?

6. "The important thing is not the fact of dying, but what you were doing in the moment of your death."  What does Renée say she was doing?

7. Do you think it was significant that Renée died while trying to help the homeless drunk who ran into the traffic?

8.  Why does Paloma feel shame when she learns of Mme. Michel's death?   Did she ever really intend to commit suicide?  Had she understood its meaning until now?

9.   On what note does the author choose to end the story?  Were you affected or changed in any way by this book?

10.  How would you rate this novel on the whole, the writing, the storytelling, the message?  Would you be interested in reading another novel by the same author?
  Do you feel that the translation from the French text reflected the exact meaning the author wrote? Were there hard to understand words or sentences? How do you rate this translation?
  

Relevant Links:
Online Dictionary (English);
Glossary of posted Definitions
French-English Dictionary;
Hôtels particuliers; An Interview with Muriel Barbery;

Discussion Leaders:  JoanP & Eloise

[JoanP]

Barbara, thank you for your thoughtful post.  - I know how annoyed you were at Renée's "whinging" -    (did you coin that term?) -  not doing anything to help herself - but complaining about how others were condescending to her.  - Can you blame them?  She was purposely playing the role of a moron, not the  refined concierge.  Did you notice that young people were able to see something in her - not only Paloma, but Olymphe, Jean Arthens - even the Pallieres boy made an attempt to engage her in conversation.  She was showing no respect for herself, how could she expect others to have treated her any differently? 
  Do  you think that without her "friends" she ever  would have  come out of her shell - or would she have continued with her solitary pursuit of learning - for the rest of her life? 

That is the question isn't it - what makes us feel we can risk a change in our perception of ourselves. Barbara

If you had to choose one, which one do you feel had the most influence on Renée's emergence  - her friend Manuela, who gave her the necessary confidence to socialize with Kakuro Ozu, or was it Kakuro, who helped her to see that she could be anything she wanted to be, regardless of class lines.  Or do you think it was Paloma who insisted she tell the real reason she was turning down Kakuro's invitation to celebrate his birthday with him - and then listened quietly and sympathetically while she relived the memories from so long ago that had traumatized her through the year?  It was probably all three, but if you had to say one, who would it be?

[BarbStAubrey]

well I saw for a long time Manuela was caught in Renée's web - so that Manuela simply responded to a change that was offered to Renée - and then it was Kakuro who saw past the impression she was creating for the benefit of her role as concierge - and so I would say he was the one who rattled things up so she could no longer hide behind the curtain she had encircled round herself.

Again I thought using Paloma as the one to sympathetically listen was too unbelievable and yet, there was no other character who could have played the part.  She was certainly the key figure for the turning point in Renée's life which I saw as the climax and therefore stating a theme - I still cannot figure out and would love to hear other opinions on why end this with her death. What is the message - I could see her and Kakuro remaining friends without a [sex] interest and so the idea that was the  only other alternative doesn't strike me as a reason for her death. I was not tied to her to want to imagine more about her future life and maybe other's were but to me it was like killing off a character in the book and why? So she could say all those neat things as she summed up her friends in a nutshell?!? The idea that she had no place to live after she rose up out of her concierge job description - so - in a story we do not have to figure out the rest of her life - her death still puzzles me.

[straudetwo]

JoanP, sorry not to have posted. fial thoughts.  I've been under the weather ever since we had 93 degrees one day and 55 the next. Will try tomorrow.

[Babi]

 "Startled" I think expresses it very well, GUM. It is so unexpected.
I also felt Barbery simply did not know how to resolve her story. 

I agree, JOANP. My favorite line is something one would more likely see
in an older person than a teen-ager. I see Barbery's thoughts in much of
what Paloma has said. Who knows,...much of Paloma may reflect Barbery at
that age.
  There were so many small gems, we couldn't possibly bring them all in.
What on earth for example, is "catless autism"?!!  So, if one has a cat, one is not entirely unable to form a relationship?   It’s a very clever phrase, but I’m not at all sure what Renee’ meant by it.
  And, As a cat person, I stop to appreciate this comment.  “..I take the measure of how the ridiculous, superfluous cats who wander through our lives with all the  placidity and indifference of an imbecile are in fact the guardians of life’s good and joyful moments, and of its happy web….”   I must point out, tho’, that cats are not by any means imbeciles.  Granted, some are smarter than others, which is equally true of us humans. 

  I found so much to think and about in this book, and the posts of other
readers was such a stimulus.  Despite a few flaws, I think this has been a remarkable book and I'm so glad it came up for discussion. My thanks and appreciation to Joan & Eloise.

[Laura]

How did you all feel about the shifting back and forth between Paloma's musings - and those of the concierge? 

I enjoy reading books told from two or more viewpoints.  That way, the reader is able to see and hear the story from different points of view, which is especially important in this story where the two narrators are unconventional big thinkers with unique views of reality.

If you had to choose one, which one do you feel had the most influence on Renée's emergence - Manuela, Kakuro, or Paloma?

Without a doubt, Kakuro.  He was the one who really saw Renee differently than others and started the ball rolling to get to know her, and to get her to reveal her true self.  Manuela and Paloma were assistants in that process, but Kakuro was the leader.

The only thought I can come up with on why Renee had to die has to do with fate, which I don’t think was touched on in the book, so it doesn’t seem “right.”  Therefore, I go back to the idea of live life while you can because it is fleeting --- you never know what is around the corner.  I am not quite satisfied with that either, but I am not one to brood over authors’ choices; I accept them as part of the story they wanted to tell.

[Eloise]

Traude, I totally agree  “For one thing, the book's ending is precipitate,  baffling and leaves the reader hanging” . For me a good book always ends too fast. On the other hand, knowing that ‘les gens heureux n’ont pas d’histoire” happy people don’t have a story so she ended it on a dramatic tone not to be trite.

As Gum said: “My assumption is that she (Barbery)  either couldn't continue her story or just simply couldn't pull the threads together for a satisfactory ending. Either way, this reader was left up in the air and somehow dissatisfied.”  It depends on whom she is addressing herself to. I also like a happy ending, but the French are usually more pessimistic and their fiction often ends in death.

Renée knew she would be laughed at if she so much as hinted that she had more knowledge as any of the tenants in her building and no one really cared about what she did, what she really was until Paloma and Kakuro appeared on the scene. But for someone like Renée acquiring knowledge was mainly something to feed her ever curious mind, it was her leasure, her secret passion.

Further I don’t quite understand why someone in her building over the past 20 years would not have related to the concierge in the proper way. Those couples all had children that would have interacted with the concierge. I don’t mean become friends with her but at least treat her with more respect and consideration. There are inconsistencies in this novel, but I will gladly forgive her this minor thing because of the quality of the prose.

Babi, my view is that this book remains a gem on several fronts, but certainly not on an effective plot, but I want to attribute that to Barbery’s inexperience as a novalist. This novel was not planned out normally if I go by her interviews about the book. At first the story was about Renée, then her husband persuaded her to include Pamela and as many have said, the narration was too often the author’s own philosophical views through the words of a 12 year old and that didn’t quite make it for readers.

I want to thank all of you for gracing this discussion with your fine posts, it was a pleasure to be here.

[joangrimes]

Eloise and Joan P,

Thank you for this discussion. I probably would not have made it through the book without your encouragement and I am glad that I read the book.

 I have enjoyed reading the posts.  They were wonderful.  Thanks to all who posted and helped with the understanding of this book.

I am sorry that I could not keep up but I did finish this book late last night.  I am still pondering it all.

Joan Grimes

[JoanP]

JoanG, I am so delighted to hear that you finished the book - in short sessions, to protect those precious eyes of yours!  Congratulations!  It's even better to hear that you liked the book.

Babi, you make me wish that we had kept a list of expressions, rather than the glossary.  Barbery's own expressions - such as "catless autism." (What did she mean by that, by the way?  We could have had  a whole new discussion  such as this!)

Eloise, I didn't know that Muriel Barbery's husband persuaded her to include Paloma to voice the author's own philosophical views!  (She should have finished the book before asking for his criticism.)   Laura, I think the author had to include another voice - we would have tired of hearing Renée's philosophical musings without another voice.    Renée seems to have learned about life from her books, from the observations of writers and poets - Paloma from her observation of others, reducing them to the lowest common denominator.  

I found Manuela to be the most interesting character in the book.  Before everyone else, she recognized  Renée's "elegance" - and paid homage with her exquisite offerings.  She and Renée had many delicious conversations about the tenants.  They both knew weakness of character when they saw it.  When Kakuro Ozu arrived on the scene, a lesser person than Manuela might have been jealous, wanting to protect her only friendship.  But Manuela was a true friend.  She did EVERYTHING she could to foster the friendship developing between the new tenant and the concierge. EVERYTHING.

So what I don't understand  - her words when she learned of her friend's death - "forgive me."  Why on earth did Manuela need forgiveness?

[straudetwo]

No really new final thoughts come to my mind. What concerned me in the book during our excellent discussion bothers me still.  Questions still exist, especially about the last full paragraph in the chapter 11, Existence without Duration and the phrase "...purloined from duration and its weary greed."
The meaning of this is a complete mystery to me.

I have the  notion that the ideas came first for Barbery. Philosophy is her métier, and she may possibly resent the idle rich, like Renée (see the social criticisms.) Then she constructed the characters around the ideas and theories. The opening salvo about Marx makes it abundantly clear that the concierge is an intelligent woman. Neither Renée nor Paloma are, to me, convincing for all the reasons we have mentioned before. Renée's obsession with hiding her natural intelligence makes no sense.  The juxtaposition of the two narrators' musings (for wont of a better word) are a little too cleverly constructed.   Right or wrong, I feel strongly that the whole exercise was designed to highlight and showcase the author's unquestionably brilliant mind.

As [/b]Laura[/b] said, the book is uneven; the ending comes too soon.  If the author had introduced a different widely known still life byPieter Claesz,  namely the one  known as Vanitas (it pictures a skull), we might have gotten the idea of an imminent death earlier.  In concur in that  Renée's death was not necessary.  Incidentally, Lucien and Lisette are indistinctly drawn and remain pale background images.

Manuela admired Renée, and  Renée loved her like a sister.  Manuela was her only friend until Kakuro came ont he scene. How very sad  to find out now that only in death did Renée address her in the familiar second person singular.  Why on earth would she do that?  A letdown for me.

Many thanks to our DLs for this phenomenal  endeavor, and the same to all participants. 
Now it is time for me to give due attention to our May book, Loving Frank by Nancy Horan., and to return to the Raj summation.

[JoanP]

The author has left us with many unanswered questions, Traudee.  Here's yet another one - did she do this intentionally?  To make us think - long after we put the book back on the shelf? 
Or - perhaps she feels she has provided the answers. (Maybe that is why she  shies away from interviews?  )

I'm remembering the start of the discussion, someone, perhaps it was you, Eloise, who said that each time she reads this book, she finds something new.  Makes you wonder how many times one must read the book to find answers, doesn't it?

There are several who have indicated that they are finishing up - we will remain open another day or two to hear from them.  In the meantime, we'd love to hear more from those of you who have finished.

One more little note here on my desktop on Manuela.  Remember that Renée referred to her as true "aristocrat" early on in the book?  Did you notice that at the end, Kakuro Ozu referred to her, his cleaning lady, as an aristocrat?  How did you understand that?

[Laura]

Traude said:  How very sad to find out now that only in death did Renée address [Manuela] in the familiar second person singular.

Were Renee and Manuela not really good friends?  How did Manuela address Renee?  I felt like the bubble of my view of their friendship had burst when I read this.

JoanP said:  So what I don't understand  - her words when she learned of her friend's death - "forgive me."  Why on earth did Manuela need forgiveness?

I don’t understand this either!  The only explanation I have come up with is that Manuela assumed that Renee was out on an errand having to do with her new found relationship with Kakuro.  Because Manuela had “forced” Renee to wear new-to-her dresses and go to the dry cleaner, Manuela assumed that Renee would not have been out, presumably going to the dry cleaner, when she was killed.  Manuela assumed that Renee would have been holed up in her concierge apartment.

However, we know that Renee was out on an errand required of her as concierge --- to buy brass polish --- and from what I can tell, Renee’s death had absolutely nothing to do with Manuela or Kakuro.

With regards to Eloise (?) finding something new each time she reads the book:
I don’t think I quite got everything in the book.  When I got to the end, I felt like I wanted to reread it so that I could appreciate all the imagery in the book that I might not have caught the first time.

[Babi]

 I noted Renee's last thoughts about Manuela,  [i]"the aristocracy of the heart is a contagious emotion, so you made of me a woman who could be a friend."[/i]
  Manuela was to Renee an 'aristocrat' of the heart.
   One definition of an aristocrat is a person who has the tastes, manners, etc., characteristic of members of an aristocracy, such as the nobility. Manuela had
a nobility of the heart, and she shared her manners ('walnuts should always be eaten at the table')  and her tastes with her friend on a basis of equality.
  I no longer have the book, so I can't go back and re-read the part about Manuela saying "Forgive me."  I don't remember that. Funny the things we
catch and the things we miss.

[joangrimes]

I know that I missed many things in the book.  I feel that I need to read it again also but will not try to do that because of my eyes. I really wish that I could read it again.

Joan Grimes

[straudetwo]

Laura, in answer to your question i # 291, 

Yes, Renée and Manuela were best friends, so special that one would have expected them to talk to each other in the second person singular, using the personal pronoun "tu", rather than the "vous", which is second person plural. (The French verb form changes accordingly.)
 
Wherever French is spoken, family members and  good friends  address each other with using "tu" in French;  an adult talks to a young child using "tu".  Everybody else is "vous". 
 
But in English,  everybody is "you"  to us:   family members, friends, teachers, annoying marketers,  even strangers who ask for directions.

Only in Biblical readings do we still see the old-English versions  "thou, thine, thy"  e.g. Thy will be done;  Thine is the kingdom; if thou doest well etc.

Why Renée did not give Manuela, her only friend and confidante,  the "tu", is incomprehensible to me.  I  do hope I have answered your question satisfactorily.

[JoanR]

This has been my second reading of this book and I think there will certainly be a third sometime in the future.  The first time through, I read it rather rapidly, absorbed in the story and the characters, gliding over what I did not understand of the philosophical concepts.  I liked having 2 different narrators - all stories are many-sided. I never for a moment thought that Paloma would actually commit suicide - she was dramatizing herself in the way of teens and was in love with the concept but glossing over the reality.  What did rather surprise me was Renee’s sudden emergence from her cocoon as a well coiffed and gowned dinner guest of a cultured gentleman.  I did not expect her to die so suddenly!  However, if one were to carry out the analogy of the newly emerged flying insect, one would expect a brief life.

The second reading on a whole different level with the discussion group has been a real eye-opener.  I have learned so much from you all and am deeply grateful. This is truly a multi-faceted book and ,as I believe Eloise said, can be read many times discovering something new each time.

One new thing I discovered was the Japanese film director, Yasojiro Ozu, a real person mentioned in the book as a distant cousin of Kakuro Ozu, the fictional character!  On looking at his bio, I saw this “…films infused with the Japanese concept of ‘Mono no aware’ - an awareness of the impermanence of things.”  This does fit, doesn’t it!

This is the middle of the night and I’ve just had a strange dream of a Japanese style banquet served on French Limoges china - my philosophy professor of 64 years ago, Max Black, was there and disapproving of me!


This is why I got up and am posting this!!  Our Hedgehog does have a very profound effect - a mark of a great book.

[Laura]

Thanks for the explanation, Traude.

We don't know if Manuela addressed Renee with tu or vous.  I would assume that both would be using either tu or vous, so maybe both were using vous. 

[Eloise]

The importance of saying « tu » or « vous »

Renée says dying about Manuela. “Now that I am about to die, I shall say tu to you at last.” Meaning that she had never said “tu” to her before. It is not surprising because in France the "tu" is not as common usage as here in Quebec where we are Americanized, I would say in that respect but when I meet someone for the first time, I automatically say “vous” to them. Saying “tu” means that we are becoming or will become friends and that can take some time.

Granted Manuela and Renée were good friends but there always remained this old fashioned etiquette between them that is still the norm in France. But the “tuiles” with their afternoon tea gave us a hint of the quality of their rapport. "vous" is more respectful than "tu"

I said “vous” to my mother, but I wanted my children to say “tu” to me. Children today say “vous” to their teachers who say “tu” to them, my grand children tell me. I say “vous” to almost everybody I just meet except someone much younger. My children say “tu” to almost everybody.

Traude explained it very well she is a Linguist who dealt with language idioms all her life. She is the authority on the matter.

All I can say finally about this book is that it is superb, a book to reread as Joan said. It is a gem of hidden meanings that are just superbly put down. The words in the mouth of a concierge only makes a situation more humorous sometimes and I laughed out loud so many times because in my mind I pictured what Renée looked like and even what her facial expressions were while she was responding to the snobbish tenants who looked down on her. I could visualize her new appearance when she went to K’s apartment all dressed up.

I think the translation was very well done, but I have to say you can’t translate a culture, and throughout the book the French culture oozes out like a pressed orange and I couldn’t see that flavour in the English version.

[Babi]

"a Japanese style banquet served on French Limoges china.. "

 JOANR, what a perfect description of this book! It now occurs to me that
early and tragic deaths are a very popular theme in Oriental cultures. More
more it appears that there is a strong Japanese influence in Ms. Barbery's
writing.

[straudetwo]

We won't soon forget this book, the characters and the ideas in it.  I agree with everything that has been said.
Éloïse, you give me too much credit. We were fortunate to have had your linguistic guidance in this adventure, something only a native speaker is able to do.  It is true that a translation cannot always fully convey the characteristics, customs,  and indeed the very essence of a different culture. Your analogy is brilliant. 
The participation was simply wonderful.

[Laura]

Thank you everyone, especially our leaders Joan and Eloise!  As always, I learned so much and got so much more out of the book than I otherwise would have reading on my own.  Talk to you all soon…

[JoanP]

Thanks, Laura, everyone. You are all so very welcome - but honestly, you are the ones Eloise and I must  thank for making this discussion as rich as it has been - on so many levels.  As you say, JoanR, there will probably be second or third readings of the book - but this time together has been extra special and enriching, truly unforgettable..

There are still unanswered questions, but I feel that Mme. Barbery  intended it that way for the most part.  The ending, for example.  Gum assumes that the author  couldn't continue her story or just simply couldn't pull the threads together for a satisfactory ending.  But, Gum, isn't life that way?  Do we really get the chance to pull all the threads together?  Perhaps that's the point Barbery is making.  It is the present that counts.  Appreciate the beauty of the rosebud, it will be gone in an instant - sometimes before it comes to full bloom.  Let friends know what they mean to you, today.  These are the things  they will have to remember you by when you are gone.    Who said this - "Live each day as if it's your last, because one of these days, it's going to be."  (No, it wasn't Yogi Berra, was it?)

Some of you thought the frequent references to philosophy were overwhelming.  Barbery said in an interview -

" I followed a long, boring course of studies in philosophy",  I expected it to help me understand better that which surrounds me: but it didn't work out that way. Literature has taught me more. I was interested in exploring the bearing philosophy could really have on one's life,"

One of the philosophers  she frequently refers to is Kant, who teaches that the only way we get to know truth, to know the world, the universe  is through observation.  Certainly Paloma is making careful observations of her world.  But the next time I read this book, I'm going to have to watch Renée more carefully.  I'm afraid she bases too many of her assumptions on literature,  letting preconceived notions cloud her understanding of people.

Perhaps Barbery is saying - we are all like the  hedgehog to some extent,  "guarding our innermost thoughts and feelings, protecting our vulnerabilities behind an emotional armor of sharp little spines."   We are so grateful to you all for opening up, expressing your innermost thoughts with us in these discussions. 
Of course, we hope to  hear from each and every one of you in the near future!