Although the first chapter starts out on a slow pace the tempo picks up with the fighting in France WW2 as the Brits head for Dunkirk and the book never quits suprising us at every turn - this change in temp is yet another way that McEwan highlights the differences in the lives of these characters before, during and after WW2.

This book is a great one for really examining our value of truth as well as, atonement for the behavior that hurts others - what a wonderful time of year for us to look closly at how we all impact society through these characters.

If you are saving a few dollars this holiday season - the book has been out long enough now that most libraries should have a copy and you can even find a copy here and there at half Price Books or on-line as a used book. I recently bought a used book, not this one, on Amazon.com and with shipping added it cost half the price of a new book plus the whole trasaction to my door took only 8 days.

I think you will be glad you joined this one - there will be lots and lots to chat about - some memories of the times in addition to our struggle to determine where the atonement is in this story and what atonement means to us.

I've the big round table in the rear all cleared, so pull up a chair and place your order - for this one I think I will order a glass of Merlot and nibble on some, lets see - of course, English Stilton and thinly sliced pears.

Barbara, you scared me—I thought the discussion was beginning. I just bought Atonement in paperback from Amazon.ca. Shipping is a bit much there (comes out to just under $5 in US$), but I was buying some French books, too. The paperback version is supposed to be available from Amazon.com sometime in November. I don't know why it isn't available from Barnes & Noble till February.

MmeW glad you will be joining us - plenty of room at the table - and please get your heart back where it belongs - we are not starting this discussion, as you figured out, till December 1. We are giving everyone their opportunity to line up their book. Sit back and fix yourself a coffee or whatever you like to drink in December.

Paperback - great - the price of this one was up there wasn't it - although I noticed this year, most of the better hardbacks were priced in the mid to upper 20s - none of this 18.95 being standard any longer.

For discussion purposes this book seperates nicely into four areas - pre-WW2 - the Dunkirk experience - the London hospital - and then the final short chapters that tie all the loose ends. We will have to figure a schedule that will be comfortable - Chirstmas is in the middle of the week and with a weekend of possible family get-to-gethers on either side of the holiday we may either want to

• finish up by the weekend before Chirstmas which would be discussing most of the main issues in a shorter amount of time
• take a week off and finish the last bit after Christmas
• we could just proceed without any change in our discussion and reading schedule

MmeW if you have any druthers let me know - we may just pole those who join us how we should handle this.

I personally will be outta here on December 28 for a week and am planning to do The Seven Sisters the first of the year, so I would rather be done by Christmas, but by all means poll and I will certainly be agreeable to anything you all decide.

Barbara - so glad you will be leading this one. Great heading too! We read Amsterdam when it came out and I suspect this will be another good discussion. I'll try to lay my hands on the book, but as a library user it's always tough!!

Will anyone else be joining the discussion? Readers - come one, come all!

Hello gang! I, too, plan on joining in. I got lucky one day at the Library last month as someone had JUST returned the book and Isnatched it up. I loved the story. I will be in NY until the 4th but my daughter has the book which will enable me to start with the group. Anybody else joining us? It's a wonderful story and we would love to have you.

Wish I could say I'll be in this discussion, but I'm quite unreliable, and I would not want anyone to count on my participation if there has to be a minimum number.

That said, I loved this story, so I will try to come in and post often during December.

Catbird: We would love to have you stop by at anytime. We already have the minimum for the book but we always encourage others to join us. It makes for a much better discussion when there are so many other opinions and thoughts to ponder , other than just our own.

Yes Catbird - any time - any thought - Alf I think this is going to be a good one - have you read it yet?

Yes, I read this one a couple of months ago. So, I'll have to go back to the library for it when we get into the discussion.

Ha! I just got notice that my order should arrive in 8-16 days though I ordered it Nov. 5 (when Atonement came out in PB). I hope it is closer to 8 than 16! Maybe I'll check the library too.

MmeW I hope you do receive your book in less time as well - it is quite a book - If you become too anxious and the library cannot help you a trick I've learned is to take myself to either Borders or Barnes and Noble for a couple of hours - get a cup of coffee and sit back in one of their chairs with the book off their shelves - no need to buy it but just read along with the others in the store reading whatever they have pulled off the shelves.

Or - the first chapter is on the internet for us and I've linked it above - the Guardian printed it out - the first chapter is very different in style than the remaining chapters but it does set the story for us -

Glad you will be joining us MmeW.

ALF - did you like the book?

Yes, Sarah, personally I DID! I'm a realist so it appealed to me.

Well we now have some links to fill out our reading - One of the most valuable links is the one on Virtue - If we are going to finish this discussion early we will probably have to plan on reading chapters One and Two during the first week - These are two very different chapters in tone and theme - the first weeks discussion could easily be all over the place - I will get a schedule up in the next few days.

Wheeee - and where are you heading MmeW? Have a safe trip -

I'm THERE, Barbara: Sunnyvale, California!

Well I sure hope it is sunny in Sunnyvale - because it is cold cold cold - rain, sleet, hail here all day - sure hope it clears so I do not have to drive in all this tomorrow - although it has warmed up to the high 40s ahum warmed up??~?

Pedln was in the discussion of Hanna's Daughters that just finished up and she indicated she was going to join us here - hurray -

Looks like it will be you; Alf, who doesn't return till next week sometime and Pedln - I should be back to post starting Sunday afternoon but I suspect we won't have too much to say till next week. I am still trying to figure out a schedule so that we complete the book by the weekend before Christmas and then we will simply leave the discussion open for futher comments and thoughts that will come up after it all jells and the Christmas holiday is an afterglow.

I'm ready whenever you all are. I read this a few months ago and will reread it quickly while i'm here at my daughter's house.

Way to go Alf - thought for sure we would get a late start but it looks like not - terrrifffic...

Schedule up - although Part One sets up the entire story and does take half the book to read the real impact is only chewed on after reading parts two and three and so, I stretched the first week out a bit longer since there is more to read. Except for those of us who have already completed reading the book, Part One will be a straight forward read and discussion. Upon completing most of the book Part One is questioned and examined as a foil to the remaining story.

While reading Part One why not look for as many triangle relationships that you can find - there is the obvious Briony, Cecilia and Robbie but there are others - in fact why not look at the reactions and relationship each character has to the other characters in Part One -

And the setting - is the garden and the house depicted as if they were characters and what kind of influence does the house and garden have on the characters in the story?

OK I am off to Collage Station - I may not post again till Sunday - HAPPY THANKSGIVING Y'ALL!

I now have the book and have started reading, Barbara.

Happy Thanksgiving everyone! I give thanks for these book discussions and all of the wonderful people SeniorNet brings together through their common love of literature!

We start - although I read the book last summer, it is an interesting reread as I find more beneath the surface - Most British authors sprinkle their work with literary allusions and so with that in mind I became curious about the title of Briony's play - what other novel has a literary character named Arabella...

Well I wasn't disappointed with my search - two books jump out and I can see both giving us a window into this story...

The Female Quixote: Or, the Adventures of Arabella by Charlotte Lennox is a vivacious and ironical novel parodying the style of Cervantes. The story portrays Arabella as the beautiful daughter of a marquis, whose passion for reading romances colors her approach to her own life and causes many comical and melodramatic misunderstandings among her relatives and admirers.

Charlotte Lennox's heroine raised in complete seclusion from the world by her misanthropic father. ( Briony was secluded in that large estate and her father was an absent father it seems)

Arabella, like Briony, grows up believing that romances (of the chivalric kind) are true and that the extravagant behavior of the knights and heroes in such texts is the model for modern (18th century) men. Arabella is doomed to be ridiculous! Her world of romance never was and never will be. But although she makes the most absurd mistakes, she is intelligent and strangely wise much of the time: she ignores fashion, she believes in complete honesty and fidelity, she rejects all accomodations to practical, but base, worldly wisdom.

She constructs a world in which women, who in the real world were quite helpless and treated as chattel, hold real power. ( this bit sounds like the mother, alone with her migranes and in fact, in the 1930s Cecilia has few choices and even Briony as well as, her cousin but who held a different kind of power. Their seeming innocense about the world was treated with deference by men which gave them the power to destroy another.)

And then we have another Lair Of The White Worm by Bram Stoker. In a tale of ancient evil, Bram Stoker creates a world of lurking horrors and bizarre denizens: demented, hellbent on mentally crushing the girl he loves; a gigantic kite raised to rid the land of an unnatural infestation of birds, and which receives strange commands along its string; and all the while, the great white worm slithers below, seeking its next victim... Bram Stoker is the creator of Dracula.

This to me is a great discription of the underlining horror of this story - a great discription - the great white worm that slithers below.

And finally I found this art work by Edvard Munch: The Frieze of Life - 1900 it is a large piece and you may have to scroll horizontally to see it all - but the characters in the painting seem to me to be reminiscent of this book with the women in white an older Briony.

the woman in white is isolated from the other people who seem to be enjoying life, while she (Briony?) only watches.

Well, I just finished Part One, and I am flattened. I mean, I knew it would happen, but it’s kind of like watching a train wreck in mesmerized horror. And I still don’t have my paperback, which I want terrifically because there are so many great things to mark! And Briony is so likeable and so on the fence between childhood and adulthood, her great sin is actually comprehensible (and therefore more tragic). That little snippit Lola, however…..

What a great contrast between the farm animals in Briony’s room and the straight-laced, hard-faced dolls.

I just assumed that Arabella came from Clarissa (silly me), though there are really no parallels to Clarissa’s mean older sister and Briony’s creation. I very much like all the similarities you found between Lennox’s heroine and Briony’s.

I was taken with the Robbie’s Malvolio references (playing the role and the wonderful quote: "Nothing that can be can come between me and the full prospect of my hopes"). Though Malvolio was pompous and stiff, he was a servant and a false letter raised his hopes, induced him to act goofy and like an equal, and ended up causing his imprisonment.

And triangles galore!! The one missing from Pierrot’s left earlobe, the two torn out of the vase, the one visible through Cecilia’s panties, the three children in the Gainsborough-type painting, the word ("three figures huddled at the foot of the cross), the never-to-be-lighted chandelier on three chains, the poster torn diagonally into two triangles, and any number of people permutations: the three Quinceys, the three Tallis children, Leon-Robbie-Cecilia, Leon-Mary-Barbara, Leon-Robbie-Paul, Emily-Jack-?, Cecilia and the twins, Robbie and the twins, Briony-Lola-mystery man.

Who was the culprit? Was it Danny (as I immediately suspected) or was it Paul, the great chocolate magnate with the scratch on his face at dinner? Was it forced or consensual (those Lolita types are deadly, as many a male teacher would agree). Does it matter?

Briony reminded me of a GATE student I had in the 70s, a 13-yr-old who told me when she found out about the birds-n-bees, "My husband and I will never do that!"

Greetings. While looking at the title as At-one-ment, page 38 caught my attention with statements about unhappiness,simple truth, and other people being as real as Briony, which would ultimately influence her experiences and writings. Am excited to complete the book with input from the discussion group.

Hi Arta62 .. to our discussion... Please feel at home and if you have questions write Babrara or me.

Atonement is a very interesting book... I read it last September.. This should be an interesting discussion.. I think I had better go back to the library and see if I can borrow it again.

Arta62, I find a lot of irony on page 38. Briony has this great revelation that other minds are equally alive as yours and have equal value, that what caused uhappiness was "confusion and misunderstanding; above all, it was the failure to grasp the simple truth that other people are as real as you." "She need not judge. There did not have to be a moral." But judge she did!

Fabulous Posts -

Welcome Arta62 so pleased you found us...wow that sentence did pop out on page 38... It wasn't only wickedness and scheming that made people unhappy, it was confusion and misunderstanding; above all, it was the failure to grasp the simple truth that other people are as real as you.

Taken out of context that is a powerful statement isn't it. It makes it harder to accept, comprehend, punish, those who are guilty of hurtful behavior - it a statement that really gives me pause when we define 'evil' as a word we attach to those who are able and have committed horrors we could not imagine - and yet these are people as real as you and I. Wow - thanks for the reminder of page 38 Arta62 and your picking out that sentence MmeW.

MmeW wonderful - you have shared one gem after the other -

• ...it’s kind of like watching a train wreck in mesmerized horror.
• a great contrast between the farm animals in Briony’s room and the straight-laced, hard-faced dolls.
• Malvolio was pompous and stiff, he was a servant and a false letter raised his hopes, induced him to act goofy and like an equal, and ended up causing his imprisonment.

MmeW I didn't catch the allusion to Malvolio - great - do you think that is why Robbie was blamed?

There never was any explanation but I wondered about Robbie's real father - the father Robbie knew left when he was a small child but, why would a man who is not able to keep up his home - the land and house is in neglect and disrepair and he has sold off some of the land to pay debts - why would he continue the high cost of educating Robbie?

Emily felt abandoned by her husband with his working so many hours in the city and I think she felt more protective of her children whose love and attention she counted on. Since Robbie was getting the attention from her husband I wondered if she was not jealous of that attention especially since Robbie's grades showed her daughter in poor light.

I also felt a sense of foreboding when while Emily was lying down trying to control her headache there was the noise from the nursery above. MmeW your post saying it’s kind of like watching a train wreck in mesmerized horror. was perfect from that point on describing the remainder of Part One.

A second read and I am seeing on page 32 all sorts of foreboding sentences Lola had come to the nursery that morning in the guise of the adult she considered herself at heart to be. Wow! The page is filled with meaning.

As much as the author (Briony) wants us to believe it was her words that pu Robbie at fault, a couple of things didn't jive - it was 1935 and in the best of high born families no 12 year old would have been given that much power, especially about sexual abuse which we are only publicaly speaking about within the last 7 or 8 years - but the mother's reaction was telling in chapter 14. Again that number 3 - three men seperate Cecilia from the letter she was trying to snatch back from her mother's grasp.

Pat I didn't know you read the book - was it dynamite when you read it - the second time around I know I am seeing all kinds of sentences that went by me as I focused on uncovering the plot during the first read. Really looking forward to your sharing with us.

Catbird Oh yes...the woman in white is isolated from the other people who seem to be enjoying life, while she (Briony?) only watches Briony is a watcher isn't she - what about the women in black - do you think she is also like Briony as an old women looking back - I thought the couple closer to the women in black - not the central couple - the ones dancing with such abandon would be Lola and her attacker.

The question I have had is why the Tritone - didn't find much when I looked up what this god was up to but did find in my Encyclopaedia of Traditional Symbols by J.C. Cooper that Fish deities and sea gods riding on fishes or dolphins typify independence of motion in the waters of life; the all possible.

Triton blows the conch shell while drawing the chariot of Poseidon who holds the power over the seas. The convolutions of the conch are suggesting the rising and setting sun, the lunar spiral and the tides. In the Graeco-Roman tradition the shell signifies resurrection in funnerary rites, also a journey across the sea and sexual passion.

Another interesting symbolism according to Cooper's book - to dive into the waters is to search for the secret of life, the ultimate mystery. And in Celtic tradition wells, etc. are the dwelling place of supernatural beings, such as the Lady of the Lake. The power of the waters represent other-world wisdom and the foreknowledge of the gods.

Of course we can all easily see that water is regeneration, baptism, the fountain of life. Also I found interesting water represents the Virgin Mary. I did not know that shells were used to sprinkle water during baptism.

It seems Dolphins are a guide to souls in the underworld, the King of Fishes, is has both lunar and solar asociations, is the feminine priciple, the womb because of the spelling delphis dolphin delphys womb. In Roman myth the dolphis represents the soul's journey across the sea of death to the Blessed Isles.

While I read the story, I feel like there is a tragedy about to happen that I, the reader, am unable to stop. I think something terrible will go wrong simply because there are too many unattended young adults in the home. It's not Emily's fault. She has those darn headaches and spells, but is it well that there is no adult in sight? Maybe, it doesn't matter, and so, should not bother me.

Oh, I wrote at the same time as you, Barbara. Thank you for help understanding the symbols.

Hats - so glad to see you among us! Boy you picked up on something didn't you- I guess I thought there was enough help around so that Emily could go off to nurse her head but than it could easily be that the help all had their tasks and watching children and young adults was not one of them. I guess I also saw Cecilia having a lot of responsibility for the children that she really didn't want - and if we were supposed to take inference from the condition of her room than she was not exactly a responsible young women was she - they were all sort of cocooned on this estate protected from the outside world but then there was no one protecting them from themselves was there.

Barbara, I thought Robbie's references to Malvolio did presage his future. And would it have been that unusual in 1935 for Briony to identify a person? She didn't have to testify to what happened, but only to the identity of the person she saw climbing the bank.

Good point, Hats! Where was the adult supervision and direction in the house? Especially with Dad out so many nights. It's a wonder there weren't more things afoot.

I may be dense, but it took me a while to figure out that Hermione had run off with a radio guy. The "wireless" allusions were quite over my head! Note that on p. 137, Emily calls Lola her sister's "incarnation." And on p. 138: "How like Hermione Lola was, to remain guiltless while others destroyed themselves at her prompting."

And why "There was an old lady who swallowed a fly"? Perhaps it is an example of what happens when you lie: the old lady keeps swallowing bigger and bigger things so they will eat the previous thing she has swallowed. And the same sort of entanglement occurs when you lie and then must lie more to cover it.

MmeW yes, I agree she did not have to testify but by that time it all seemed to be over - I guess I am wondering why she was given any attention at all and why Emily didn't dismiss what she was saying as the chatterings of a child - I'm thinking how easily I was dismissed in the 1930s.

Aha the page you pointed out 137 - it may simply be that all this is the outcome of Emily's past ghosts of her sister grabbing the spotlight and her daughter, Briony acting like her sister just as Lola is her sister incarnate. As much as these girls have opposite needs and are not good friends for Emily they have more in common than they realize.

Briony does obsessively go after that letter till she finds it - I wonder if that was where she believed her guilt lie - Briony doing a mia culpa later in the book I wonder, although she had a part in the outcome it wouldn't have amounted to swat if Emily hadn't picked up on it and used her information supported by the letter from Robbie to Cecilia.

It seems to me the letter alone would not have nailed him since when the police would search his room they would find the alternate letter. Somehow the 'powers that be' wanted Robbie crucified and at that time in history who else in the house could have been blamed. The other men were all a step above in status except for Jackson.

In the beginning of Chapter six Emily sounds like she is either envious of Cecilia's education or resentful over her own lot in life as compared to Cecilia. Emily believes Cecilia's education is not going to do her any good when she takes her place in the scheme of finding the 'right' husband etc. etc. as if Emily's expectations in life are carved in stone for Cecilia - than for sure Emily would want to be assured her daughter does not marry the help.

Possibly the truth is many people had a hand in Robbie's conviction, each having their own agenda with Robbie serving as a convenient scapegoat. None of these characters are angles including Robbie. I just see more of Emily's hand and not, because she had anything against Robbie as a person but, her hand was forced and as head of the house in the absence of her husband, she had to lead. Her rush to judgement was supported by all her unfulfilled needs.

hmmm I wonder if our picture of an orderly house is someone taking responsibility so that chaos does not rule because chaos brings out the worst. Hmmm the house and gardens are run down, needing repair; Emily has frequent disabling headaches, her sister Hormione left her children and husband; Jack Tallis is away more than he is home and has been selling off the 'farm' in order to keep the house; Cecilia has no clear idea for her future; all the children including Briony have the run of the house as Hats points out; Robbie is educated and acts beyond his station - sure sounds like a tipsy turvey environment -

hmmm just thought maybe all this is trying to say look how everything was coming apart at the seams prior to WW2 - the European Kings were dallying with their Empires not paying attention to their homefront as Jack Tallis was dallying with his work; The Queens were in the dark as to what was really happening as Emily lay in her darkened room while she thinks voices overhead is her guest speaking to her nephews; the young were easily influenced by outside forces who did not prepare them to carry out their duty, the old order was in chaos and someone had to pay for this state of affairs.

You’re right, Barbara. There’s no doubt that Emily didn’t approve of Jack’s underwriting Robbie’s education. "Robbie’s elevation. ‘Nothing good will come of it,’ was the phrase she often used." She saw something "manic and glazed in his look" that night (143), so she was certainly predisposed to think the worst.

Her attitude toward Cecilia’s education, though, may have been due to the way things were. After all, the college didn’t even award degrees to women, so first or third made no difference. "[I]t was preposterous for her to be disappointed" over her third. As you say, in Chapter Six, Emily certainly dwells on the jargon, the posturing of the girls’ rowing eight, the admiration of eccentric women profs. The narrator says that "made Emily Tallis a little cross, though not remotely jealous," but should we believe him? I tend to. She was cross at the frivolity of it all, and wanted to get Cecilia married off "if three years at Griton had not made her an impossible prospect."

To me Briony’s identification of the shadowy figure was much more important to Robbie’s indictment than the letter (though not perhaps in Briony’s eyes, for it was that which convinced her that Robbie was a maniac).

When Briony first says Robbie’s name at the temple, she has asked Lola who it was. She waits, but not long, and then answers for her: "the younger girl could no longer hold herself back. Everything connected. It was her own discovery. It was her story, the one that was writing itself around her." It was as though she wrested the lead in the play back from Lola.

And dear little Lola, "Lola did not need to lie, to look her supposed attacker in the eye…." (158) Emily said it ("How like Hermione Lola was, to remain guiltless while others destroyed themselves at her prompting.") and Briony suspected it with the play, "Lola was relying on the twins to wreck the play innocently, and needed only to stand back and observe." (32)

Barbara: who else in the house could have been blamed. The other men were all a step above in status except for Jackson. Danny Hardman was the son of a servant, and indeed the description of him was not the most savory.

"It bothered [Briony] too when she noticed Danny Hardman watching [the play rehearsals] from the doorway. He had to be asked to leave." (33)

[Cecilia] had noticed him hanging around the children lately. Perhaps he was interested in Lola. He was sixteen, and certainly no boy. The roundness she remembered in his cheeks had gone, and the childish bow of his lips had become elongated and innocently cruel. (45)

Yet Briony's ID precluded consideration of any other suspect.

Yes, your are right MmeW- she was like a quarterback or cheerleader - she said charge and they all fell in behind her accusation - still something does not sit well with me - to blame all this on Briony and maybe that is it - no one stood up for Robbie.

Although Cecilia was prevented from taking back the letter, even she went along with the crowd -

Lola wanted to protect her rapist - if it was rape - why? I do not like to even say this because it is so typical of what is really said about a girl experiencing rape - through out history we have blamed the girl - she wanted it - she didn't object - she liked it and is only now making a fuss - she is embarrassed now that others know and so she is saying rape - having read the book though I know she protected the rapist - why?

Emily had issues why she wanted Robbie out of the way -

The rapist of course is relieved it is Robbie being jailed -

But to go so far as to have a man accused and sent to prison on the word of a 12 year old just does not fit for me - to me she simply provided the offerings for the others to hide behind and they did - I guess I see the others as more guilty since, except for Lola and the twins, they were all older -

Again in that time in history Briony could have so easily been dismissed as a mere child but hmmm am I saying she was also scapegoated - that all her life she had the burden of believing she sent Robbie to prison when I still think it would not have happened if others had opened their mouths.

With all Cecilia's education where was she in her support for Robbie - although to me she reflected the truer version of '1930s girl power' which amounted to zilch.

Ah I need to say - folks we do not have to agree on any of this - Please, I hope all of you are sharing from your own values, reading experience etc. The beauty of this discussion is to read the various interpretations from each reader - They say, reading is a creative act - that we bring to a read ourselves and we are each different in our life experiences.

And so please, think of this discussion as taking place in a comfy warm room or around a big table with drink or hot coffee in hand, just sharing with us what you observe and let's see if we can fathom the themes that McEwan has served us in this book.

MmeW, I remember Emily's thoughts of Robbie. She even goes so far as to suggest that he might be smoking a reefer. "Might he be smoking the reefers she had read about in a magazine..." (142).

I find this book totally engrossing. If anything, I am learning that my eye and my thoughts can deceive me. There are misunderstandings galore in this book. One love scene in a library is turning into a night of horrors. I don't think Cecilia is unhappy or not consenting to Robbie's advances, but Briony's interpretation is that Robbie is hurting her sister. In Briony's eyes, he is a "beast."

A part of me wishes that Briony had went on with her play. Then, her imagination would have been put to good use. After all, the twins act out because they wanted the play to go on too. Maybe, our imaginations must be used like our hands or our feet. It is our choice whether they are put to a good use or a bad use. Briony's mind was active. She used it in the only way left to her.

So glad you dropped in Joan, Thanks for bringing us the Jonathan Yardley review - please, no sitting in the corner here.

Boy did you nail Paul eeuuwwwh - the man gave me the chills - Lola, as young as she is, sure put him in his place when he so cavalier spoke of reading about their parents in the newspaper. I guess the idea of making a fortune with a plan based on the death and destruction of war is too callous for me and yet, this is the kind of business mind it takes to wage war. He being such the entrepreneur is reminiscent of the Grandfather who established the family fortune through trade in locks and bolts. I wonder if a point is being made here that country estates are usually owned by the landed gentry and not some upstart business man who to the gentry would be thought of not too unlike a Paul Marshall. Therefore, the girls not to have a positive impression of Paul Marshall is saying something about their own family’s fortune and heritage.

I think we read this book poking through so many metaphors and thinking through Psychological motivations because in order to have atonement there must be something to atone for - what and who and how are these characters out of alignment with what is good and just. Bottom line I think we are looking for who is most culpable and in what way are they responsible for Robbie’s imprisonment.

Great Joan for the reminder that Cecilia “detests order, craves adventure - in such sharp contrast to Briony's need for order and control.” along those same lines I loved her comments about writing a story on page 35 - “A story was direct and simple, allowing nothing to come between herself and her reader-- no intermediaries with their private ambitions or incompetence, no pressures of time, no limits on resources. In a story you only had to wish, you only had to write it down and you could have the world; in a play you had to make do with what was available: no horses, no village streets, no seaside. No curtain...a story was a from of telepathy...so common place that no one stopped too wonder at it...you saw the word castle, and it was there, seen from some distance...” I remember daydreaming like this as a Kid and at times still have problems going beyond the fact that life is more like a play with all these ‘make do with’ restrictions.

Hats I love it - “Briony's mind was active. She used it in the only way left to her.” Too bad she and everyone else could not see that she was using her imagination or again I still wonder if they did know but were not consciously acknowledging it since the story she concocted was too convenient for each of their issues. Hmm maybe that is it - Cecilia - I couldn’t figure out why she didn’t go to bat for Robbie and maybe she wanted her freedom more than love and marriage as Joan reminded us she craved adventure.

I found and included above another link that included this King August and Höroldt.

McEwan has a lot to say about that vase - more than it being a family heirloom - I cannot figure out what all that information about the Chinese figures and flowers was all about - now the uncle fighting in WW1 in France sort of ties in Part Two of this book but what was all this explanation of Meisson about I wonder.

I think I better prepare a cheat sheet for myself MmeW - I am getting all these character's names mixed up - a lot of guys in this story.

Oh a good one Joan - can you just see him coming home thinking he was a hero for finding the child and there are the police taking him to jail.

For that matter even Cecilia experiences a loss of innocence doesn't she - no longer the mad cap young women playing games, trying out adult sex with her childhood playmate - thinking if she should spend time in Paris with Hormaine.

Lola I cannot figure out - having read the entire book I am not clear if she was raped or not - it may be that Briony came along at an in-opportune time and Lola became an actress - it was Briony who decided that Lola was raped and it does appear sex in the garden was not Lola's first experience with sex that weekend. I really would like to have other's opinion and reaction to Lola's story but it would have to be after we have read 'London 1999' when we will learn the better part of Lola's story.

By the way Joan did you experience any loss of electricity - can you get out of your driveway?

Good one, indeed, Joan. Barbara, is loss of electricity anything like loss of innocence?

Thank you, Joan. I never thought of "loss of innocence."Although, it is so evident. I am excited again about the book. I remember my loss of innocence but would not feel comfortable sharing it here. I can say I stood in the same place as Briony. I came upon a scene that was not meant for me, the child, to see.

Thinking of Briony's loss of innocence gives me a better understanding of her as a person. I liked Robbie from the beginning and could see him being led like a sheep to the slaughter. I hope it is alright to use that religious analogy. He was so happy discovering his first love.

Of course, poor Lola! I felt very sorry for her. Oh, Barbara, I will keep my mind and eyes open for Lola. I will not make a quick judgment.

What about Robbie's mother? She suffered a loss that night too. I could just feel for her as she used her umbrella to beat on the constable's car as she watched her innocent son being driven away, under arrest, the horror of any mother.

I love the book. I am just sorry that so many of the metaphors and symbolism are over my head.

I am not finished the book yet. I am finished Part I. I have not started Part II.

Hats I am so glad you are staying with this read - next week is Part Two so you have plenty of time - Part One is the bigger portion of the book, so the lions share of reading is completed - And you do nail these characters Hats - brilliant and oh the pain of that mother - it is through her we can really feel the helplessness of one against the 'powers that be', the injustice of it all, and then in response not just hurt but, that hurt and helplessness turns to anger and rage. This is what I wanted from Cecilia but I wonder if she is so dependent on those who crusified Robbie that she is not able to risk touching anger and rage. I get a feeling of depression as Cecilia visits and stays true to Robbie. Her staying true seems out of loyalty to him rather than what she really wanted for her life.

Sure makes you think how an experience can change your life from the path you imagined - Robbie, Cecilia seem to me to have had their entire lives turned around because of what has happened.

hehehe you two MmeW and Joan with your Electricity like Innocence - now are you thinking as Anthony Lohn did in his poem Wired Art from Wired Hearts which starts off:

In love with your ghost

A scent of lilac wafts on the lingering breeze
goose bumps ripple across your breasts
brilliant sunlight streaks the mossy earth,
two bodies pulse as one.
Shadows play silly games of tag
muscles tighten fingers clench
fluids mingle tiny screams whispers
electricity sparks in every nerve
trees sway and moan your name...

But I wonder if you stumbled on as aspect of the book with all the fun and games - Surely McEwan living in England, where it seems every child can quote Blake, he would be familiar with the themes that many speak of as Electricity in Blakes poetry - His Marriage of Heaven and Hell is often quoted but this page explaining his paired poems The Lamb and The Tyger is an eye opener and relevent to this book - it is easy to see who are the lambs but who are the Tygers in Atonement? Finding Truth Through Blake's "The Lamb" and "The Tyger" I wonder if this theme of a God who makes the lamb and the tyger is woven into the story or if it is simply a question we ponder upon reading Atonement?

Wow - in that same site there is this explanation of The Clod and the Pebble that sounds to me for all the world like what McEwan is attempting when he wrote Atonement !

Amazing - this book is an education just looking up the named books, authors and art work - decided to see what I could find out about Robbie alluding to The Romaunt of the Rose on page 79 where he mentions his advanced stage of fetishizing the love object.

Fifty Treasures from Glasgow University Library includes a copy of (pictured here) Chaucer's The Romaunt of the Rose c.1440-1450

Guillaume de Lorris’s poem, Romance of the Rose rendered out of the French by Chaucer is the most famous and popular poem in all European literature for nearly three centuries. The Romaunt of the Rose translates a long dream vision, part elegant romance, part rollicking satire, written in France during the thirteenth century. The first part of this 'allegory of love,' is a lyric game of love, the second part blames women for causing men so much unhappiness.

The French original, Le Roman de la Rose, had a profound influence on Chaucer. From the sixteenth century to the mid-nineteenth, scholars assumed that The Romaunt... comprised large fragments of that translation. Subsequent debates have divided it into segments, and arguments are offered that Chaucer was responsible for one or more of them, or for none. The current consensus is that he wrote the first 1,705 lines. In 1230 the first 4058 lines was writen by Guillaume de Lorris and in 1275 the remaining 17,622 lines, by Jean de Meun.

The scene of this French love tales was laid in a garden, not only the individual persons who act a part in this dream-romance are allegorical figures, but the different parts of the garden are intended to have an allegorical meaning.

Typical of Latin and French love poems is the medieval garden fountain as the centre of the piece. It is as clear as crystal, its waters flowing over silver pebbles, ever fresh and always glistening. In Romance of the Rose, the well is of peculiar importance. It has on its edge two crystals, which show all the colors of the rainbow when the sun goes down. One of the crystals is a magic mirror, that shows half the garden in it, and if you look up, there is the same picture to be seen again.

The wall is also painted in the colours of allegory, it is an enclosed garden wall with a little entrance gate. The garden is a perfect square, fine trees overlook it, and in them birds sing beautiful songs. The trees are set at exactly equal distances, they are tall, and their tops are interwoven so that no sun-rays can get through. Squirrels play about in the branches, and on the thick grass. Clear streams, and wells that have no frogs in them, are here, and the banks are made pretty by brightly-coloured grasses and lovely flowers. We owe our clearest conceptions of the gardens of this period to the miniatures painted for the Romaunt of the Rose and its imitations.

The theme of the Romaunt of the Rose occupied Sir Edward Coley Burne-Jones, (uncle to Rudyard Kipling) intermittently for over twenty years. The Heart of the Rose and its companion, The Pilgrim at the Gate of Idleness, together with the larger painting, Love Leading the Pilgrim (Tate Gallery), form a trilogy on a romantic theme loosely based on parts of Chaucer's poem Rumaunt of the Rose.

The long, long...THE ROMAUNT OF THE ROSE FRAGMENT A. - FRAGMENT B. - Coment Raisoun vient a L'amant. - Comment Raisoun diffinist Amistie. - FRAGMENT C.

And on Robbie's bookshelf as writen on page 87...

The Oxford Companion to English Literature says: The poet contrasts the cruel realities of country life with the Arcadian pastoral favoured by poets. The Village by George Crabbe (1754-1832)

W.H. Auden : Dance of Death

WH Auden, 'Musee des Beaux Arts'. ... Silence: Death as Annihilation in Renaissance Tragedy, images from Holbein's Dance of Death.

There does seem to be many verses of poetry to ponder in 'Atonement.' While reading further, and at the same time, looking at the title, 'Atonement.' My mind seems to fix on forgiveness.

Almost every person in the plot needs to forgive another person. Cecilia struggles with forgiving her family for their part in convicting Robbie. Robbie wonders whether he should or will ever be able to forgive Briony, even though she was a child of thirteen years old. Robbie might also need to forgive his father who left he and his mother. Then, there is Briony who needs to forgive herself for hurting her sister, Cecilia, and her first love, Robbie.

On page 228, I see the lines of a poem "In the deserts of the heart / Let the healing fountain start." These are the lines written in a letter by Cecilia to Robbie. At this point, I wonder if she has come to grips with the pain her family caused her and wants to help Robbie to learn to forgive too.

I think these lines would be great in a Christmas card. Maybe??

ORDER AMONGST CHAOS. It 's remarkable  how many references there are to the word order (and disorder) in this novel.    Initially, we learn that Brionny is possessed by the desire for order with everything arranged and organized.  Is that typical of a writer ?

Lola and the twins are welcomed into this ship-shape household during a terrible upheavel in their lives caused by  their parents divorce.    "Emily and Cecilia maintained a patter that surely robbed the guest of the ease it was supposed to confer. "
Emily- docile and tranquil nursing her migraines certainly gives the appearance of being orderly even though we feel that she will be at peace.  More upheavel.

Cecelia, bored, loving the untidiness of her room remains restless at home,laying around and calmly smoking cigarette after cigarette.  Our author describes this as self-punishment.  Now that surely is an upheavel of spirit.  ...it was spikes, traps and awkward turns that caused her to dislike herself almost as much as she disliked him...(Robbie)

Robbie- commanding, methodical and disciplined reaches out to quell the turbulence of C's fury.  (More upheavel.)
The rehearsals even become disorderlyas poor Brionny agonizes.
Hardman shows an expression of tranquil incomprehension.  His description is disorderly as we see him acne faced and innocently cruel.  I love this reference to disorder- ".she  (cecelia) had been feeling strage and seeing strangely as though everything was already long in the past, made more vivid by posthumous ironies she could not quite grasp."
Marshall- methodical and orderly, calmly takes control of the conversation re. Army Amo.
Leon- strikes me as orderly, disciplined and precise.
   

Hats- I love that thought about forgiveness so early in the story. I shall return later. I feel as if I'm scurrying in and out with these thoughts.

Joan I too cannot figure out the narrator - as you read, the story is saying Briony is the narrator but then, we are seeing things Briony does not see and we are offered other perspectives than the ones Briony sees. And yet, we do not have the entire picture either or, maybe we do have the entire picture but not all the rational for the characters behavior.

These English authors - whew, they can't even describe a love scene without alluding to literature or poets from the past. I love the phrase you quoted from Auden's Benjamin Britten's Ballad of Heroes the words of this poem are just too wonderful not to enjoy here - it is probably on the internet someplace but I quick grapped my Book of poems by Wysten Hugh Auden and here it is.

It's farewell to the drawing-room's civilised cry,
The professor's sensible whereto and why,
The frock-coated diplomat's social aplomb,
Now matters are settled with gas and bomb.

The works for two pianos, the brilliant stories
Of reasonable giants and remarkable fairies,
The pictures, the ointments, the frangible wares
And the branches of olive are stored upstairs.

For the devil has broken parole and arisen,
He has dynamited his way out of prison,
Out of the well where his papa throws
The rebel angel, the outcast rose.

The behaving of man is a world of horror,
A sedentary Sodom and slick Gomorrah;
I must take charge of the liquid fire,
And storm the cities of human desire.

For it's order and trumpet and anger and drum
And power and glory command you to come;

The fishes are silent deep in the sea,
The skies are lit up like a Christmas tree,
The star in the West shoots its warning cry:
'Mankind is alive, but Mankind must die.'

So good-bye to the house with its wallpaper red,
Good-bye to the sheets on the warm double bed,
Good-bye to the beautiful birds on the wall,
It's good-bye, dear heart, good-bye to you all.

Since this piece was not published/written till 1939 and the story was supposed to start in 1935 McEwan is either showing that Robbie spent time waiting in jail before his hearing and sentencing, or McEwan fudged on timing. I understand the poem is often attributed to the early warnings of WW2.

Having experienced migraines when Doctors dismissed it as tension or a monthly issue and before even the early medication filled with Barbiturates was available I can easily feel what Emily is feeling in her dark room - I remember feeling so guilty and being in so much pain and I too thought I was keeping tabs on the children and the household while lying in bed. Your whole body is in a state of tension just trying to keep the headache at bay and then on top, the stress of doing the wrong thing by lying in bed during the day while the responsibilities to your family lay heavy - how easy it is now to take something and with less than an hour's nap you're operational.

I get the feeling that Robbie's Mom basked in the warmth of being taken care of and in the pride of her son doing so well where as, Emily seems to be driven by demons. I do think it is too easy for us to put today's values on Emily because if she guessed something was a foot with her absent husband what could she do about it except divorce and then she would be like her sister - I get the impression Emily like Briony also 'needs' to be perfect - remember the choice of dinner, although proper it is inappropriate because of the heat. In the 1930s the 'good' 'perfect' wife didn't question the comings and goings of the men, the head of the household.

Hats to me you hit on the million dollar question this book is nudging " 'Atonement.' My mind seems to fix on forgiveness."

I think this is a book urging us too examine our own interpretation of ATONEMENT! And for me the other side of the coin what behavior do we expect from someone who is atoning - how do we picture atonement? Some have broken the word apart and make it at-one-ment. 'Ment' meaning: action; process; appeasement; advancement - the means; instrument; process or agent of of an action. And so we have -- action that shows being at one with whoever you have injured.

The dictionary says Atonement is: Amends or reparation made for an injury or wrong; man's reconciliation with God after having transgressed the covenant or The reconciliation of God and man brought about by Christ; Radical obedience and purification; Reconciliation; Concord.

According to the dictionary 'Forgiveness' has a different meaning - To excuse for a fault of offense; Pardon from a payment of; To pass over an offense and to free the offender from the consequesces of it. To grant pardon without harboring resentment.

If we are supposed to make atonement to those we injure, be at one with God and those injured, how does one make atonement for something he knows he didn't do but others are angered and grieved believing he did the unacceptable?

How about forgiveness - are we able to forgive all aggressors or will we only commute forgiveness if they show 'proper' (our picture of) signs of atonement.

How do we exact either atonement or forgiveness when we are not always privileged to see and know reality - when we hold a view of what certain behavior means or what behavior should look like during various life experiences without having a more educated understanding for what is taking place. (I'm thinking on the fear of the boys arrested for the Central Park rape and how culpable they seemed to the police, the newspapers and the public.)

How does someone in Hitler's army attached to a camp atone for their role in that horror? How do we atone for killing so many Japanese citizens when we dropped the bomb - the bomb was not dropped on the army as Japan attacked ships in Pearl Harbor but on citizens, as if the Japanese attacked Detroit or Portland. We justify the action as a correct way to end the slaughter and I am not even questioning that but women, children, old people were killed and horribly injured.

I do not want to take us off track here but this story is leading us to WW2 and the word Atonement strikes not only personal chords but I wonder about the national conscience (after so much horror in inflicted during war) just because you live in and support your country.

It seems the only atonement I hear about is awarding money in huge amounts - is this atonement? Is this the process, the action that reconciles the aggressor as one with the injured?

I have not read the link above completly but I understand the early bible explains a process where a goat, considered the scapegoat in later times, is heaped with the sins of the tribe and sent to wonder alone in the desert or to be slaughtered taking the tribes sins with it. Hmm what sins were the young men jailed for the Central Park rape carrying from that city? What sins is Robbie carrying into Jail and later into WW2?

Hats you opened pandora's box of questions!

And you also found some wonderful poetry from W.H. Auden: In Memory of W.B. Yeats I recently found this poem on tape read by Auden - great listening while driving. The ending - aaha

In the deserts of the heart
Let the healing fountain start,
In the prison of his days
Teach the free man how to praise.

Alf welcome home - so glad to see your thoughts on chaos and order - wow another aspect of this story - there are more themes going and everyone of them is more than a stroll in the park - I recently purchased a book that is exclaiming that science has now put math to chaos - whosh that says to me our desire for order is severe. We sure look down our noses don't we at disorder. But your statement that made the biggest impact is " surely is an upheavel of spirit.

Is that not the cry of the twentieth century and the theme that describes the canon of literature that was written during the twentieth century? Seems to me I remember Bloom putting that lable on 20th C. literature. McEwan is getting it all in isn't he. And what a perfect observation you have made Alf especially in light of trying to understand Atonement after the horrors of the twentieth century.

Ok family calls - daughter, sister, all long distance - thank goodness no migraine hehehe.

Barbara, what questions! It gives me more and more to think about in this book. "How does someone in Hitler's army attached to a camp atone for their role in that horror? How do we atone for killing so many Japanese citizens when we dropped the bomb..." Golly, I don't know the answer to that question. I am beginning to think there is far more to the word "atone" than I can imagine. My only answer is the Christian church. In Christianity we are taught that the Son of God's crucifixion paid for all those awful deeds, the ones we have committed and the ones we have given allegience too.

Still, when we have committed a horrible deed against someone else, like Briony did against Robbie, that demon of guilt can drive you nuts. I am sure that is why Briony chose to go into nursing. It was a way to sacrifice herself for others whether she wanted to or not. I think that's called penance. I hope my definition for penance is correct.

Anyway, I know about those awful migraines too. I suffered with them when my boys were small. I remember putting a pillow over my head and wanting to die. Now, I don't suffer with them. Knock on wood.

Well, Alf and Barbara, I finished Part II between Friday and Saturday morning. I have never been one for reading war stuff. I can't understand all the military terms, but I really got into Part II. I am look forward to reading the link up in the heading about Dunkirk.

I like reading with the schedule so, I am not starting Part III yet.

Hats please I think we all have our definition of any of these philosophical words like atonement, forgiveness, penance - I am just a compulsive about pinpointing possible definitions I've overlooked since I am troubled about how we treat wrongs, what we expect when we have experienced wrongs, and as Joan's post is alluding how does all this come about.

Since reading this book I've picked up a copy of Simon Wiesenthal's new edition of The Sunflower The link takes you to the readers quide which also gives a wonderful synopsis of the book - I find reading Atonement a soul wrenching experience.

Hats I wonder if you haven't hit on something that Briony goes into nursing as her Atonement - if nothing else she is certainly changed by the experience. I am anxious to hear your thoughts on Part Two.

Joan the issues about the missing fathers is not ever explained in the book and yet, they seem so central don't they - the father's role seems the key piece to the puzzle and it is left unexplained - this is so frustrating - and so now I am trying to discover why this is frustrating me.

To me what happened and didn't happen that night seems like a shoe found in the rubble that this family represents. It is like reading about the aftermath of a family having experienced a cataclysmic eruption and we are left with the pieces which include this night of drama as we try to reconstruct what the family looked like before the earlier eruption.

Now I am wondering if I have this fairytale idea of what a family should look like and when it doesn't, I think of it as chaos that needs unraveling with all my "if only's" in place that could prove that this family 'could have' fit my fairytale. Ah so -- I must say I am so glad Alf observed and brought to our attention the order versus chaos aspect of the story. Alf clarified for me one of the issues at hand.

Starting either today if you would like to leave some early thoughts but according to the schedule tomorrow for sure we go forward and learn what happened to some of the members of this family as history plays its part in their lives.

Joan with the many discussions you have led that included WW2 Vets have any of them spoken of Dunkirk?

Before we leave Part One there was one other I wanted to learn a bit more about - I need to find it in the book where Briony's play was placed in the library between two books that were named - I was not familiar with either book and wanted to see if they were a telling clue. Then on to WW2 and Dunkirk --

hmmm interesting quotes

• page 112 Lola "took Briony's hand. "I think the police should know about him."...Lola tightened her grip and seemed to read the younger girl's mind. "We just need to show them the letter."
• page 115 "When her father was home, the household settled around a fixed point. He organized nothing, he didn't go about the house worrying on other people's behalf, he rarely told anyone what to do--in fact, he mostly sat in the library. But his presence imposed order and allowed freedom. Burdens were lifted. When he was there, it no longer mattered that her mother retreated to her bedroom; it was enough that he was downstairs with a book on his lap. When he took his place at the dining table, calm, affable, utterly certain, a crisis in the kitchen became no more than a humorous sketch; without him, it was a drama that clutched the heart. He knew most things worth knowing, and when he didn't know, he had a good idea which authority to consult, and would take her into the library to help him find it..."
• page 139 Emily saying to herself, "Wronged child, wronged wife. But she was not as unhappy as she should be. One role had prepared her for the other." she notices "smeared cocktail glasses yet to be cleared away, and that the doors into the garden still stood open."
• page 140 "She did not wish to know why Jack spent so many consecutive nights in London. Or rather, she did not wish to be told."
• page 160 about Briony, "She would never be able to console herself that she was pressured or bullied. She never was. She trapped herself, she marched in to the labyrinth of her own construction, and was too young, too awestruck, too keen to please, to insist on making her own way back. She was not endowed with, or old enoguth to possess, such independence of spirit..."
• page 163 "...it ramained everyone's secret, shared in whispers among shifting groups that broke away self-importantly to new business."
• page 167 "For the second time that evening Emily was obliged to assert her rights over written messages passing through her household."..."If you had done the right thing young lady, with all your education, and come to me with this, then something could have been done in time and your cousin would have been spared..."

Onward to Part Two where we find Robbie neither Fish nor Fowl - of common heritage but educated as the upper class.

Heals where Corporal Nettle worked before the war.

Cyril Connolly

In case you did not notice the page above giving the account of Dunkird has several pages. This one has a few more maps Dunkirk

The Messerschmitt Bf 109 that strafes Robbie.

Great site explaining the Battle of Britain the site includes many links to officers and their story as well as WW2 British Flying Aces.

Joan-  I missed that "come back" connection when I read this.

I love to read war stories proving once again that people are all the same, wordwide.  We meet the brothers who brought food and wine (glass tumblers) to toast to the Brits,  the French and the defeat of the Germans.   They, too had witnessed the horrors of warfare and the men all traded stories and smokes in the barn.

Sleepless Robbie, knowing that if he were captured he wouldn't survive and there would be "no way back" recalls Cecelia's letters.  He was naturally in love with her words.  How easy that would be for someone in prison to worship words and exchange thoughts that alleviate the agony of incarceration and isolation.    Imagine how glorious that would feel after three and a half years to be able to remain anonymous and enjoy the routine of army life.  He particularly enjoyed the marches as his training and anxiety over the impending war increased.

Joan, bravo on the "come back" connection! It's beautiful. I finally got my copy of Atonement so I can write in it (I'm just lost without that). It's such a lovely book I'm having a hard time finding specific things to write about, but I am enjoying all your comments.

It struck me in Part I how many scenes are viewed through or into windows, like so many silent movies minus the dialogue cards so the viewer must imagine what is going on. I must admit I’ve done the same thing on occasion if I see a couple arguing in a restaurant.

It was interesting to discover Briony's crush on Robbie when she was 10 because we have no inkling of that in Part I. Did the "woman spurned" mindset affect her accusation of Robbie? I still tend to think it was simply Briony's love of drama, her feeling of self-importance and desire for the limelight.

She was waiting on the bridge "until events, real events, not her own fantasies, rose to her challenge, and dispelled her insignificance." Of course, "the moment was entirely Lola’s," but they whisked her upstairs and her "cousin’s removal left Briony centre stage." In search of the infamous letter, she was "energised now by a sense of doing and being good, on the point of springing a surprise that could only earn her praise. It was rather like Christmas morning sensation of being about to give a present that was bound to cause delight, a joyful feeling of blameless self-love.

She reminds me in many ways of the girls in "The Crucible" who whip themselves into a frenzy of accusations simply because they are getting a lot of attention (and feeding off each other; Briony feeds off her own imagination).

Yet Robbie has a totally different concept of what happened ("only one theory held up"), imagining that she had been nursing her crush and was waiting to talk to him. He sees as the only possible explanation that "he had betrayed her love by favouring her sister," the library only confirmed it. "First disappointment and despair, then a rising bitterness."

Robbie thinks of "the indifference with which men could lob shells into a landscape. … They need never see the end result—a vanished boy." He sees himself as that vanished boy, but not due to Briony’s indifference, due rather to a "flash of malice, …infantile destructiveness, …rancour."

But I suspect that it was indeed indifference—she was getting the (male?) attention she wanted, indifferent to its cost.

At the end of Part II, Robbie struggles with his confused thoughts about guilt and innocence. Briony "would rewrite the past so that the guilty became the innocent." But everyone was guilty, witnesses too, those who left others to die on the roadside in France (like those at the house who encouraged Briony even while suspecting that she was inventing her ID?). He speaks of his "unfinished business in France," his "invisible baggage," and the need to retrace his steps to bury the vanished boy ("Let the guilty bury the innocent"). He remembers his triumphal return with the twins contrasted with his inability to save the Flemish woman and her child. Is he to blame? "No" he shouts.

Everyone is guilty, and everyone needs to atone.

MmeW, I missed the "many windows" in Part I. Immediately, I think of our eyes being the windows to our souls. I have heard that statement many times in life.

How odd, so many places to view the outside beauty, the beautiful gardens, fountains, and from the outside looking inward the family and friends could view the interior beauty, the Meissen Porcelain and other glories in the home. but still, something is missing.

I wonder if it is the interior, the heart of a matter, that needs more examination for the people who live on this estate. If I had to pick one person who seems to spend time looking inward, examining her soul, it is Emily. Emily thinks constantly about her relationship with her sister, Hermione, and her niece, Lola.

Thinking only of Emily's horrible migraines, the times when she is away from the family, locked away in her bedroom because of pain, it seems easy to think of her as weak or fragile, but really, Emily is a very smart woman who has chosen not only to look outward at the exterior but to turn inward and examine relationships and motives. Maybe, Emily spent too much time examining the past and not living in the present. I don't know.

I think Robbie used a window to look inward at his inner heart during prison time and during wartime. No one wants to go to prison, but while there, some people have come to a place of "atonement," and during wartime, facing a horrible injury or the nearing of death, other people have become at one with their inner self and come away better people. So, is it possible for a window to symbolize any time or any place where a person come to see themselves and others in a clearer light.

In a way, I don't think Briony needs to atone for her misdeed. Briony was only thirteen years old. Is she to be held accountable for what happened or what she said and did? I think it is the adults around her who are the ones responsible. If there is to be a scapegoat, I don't think it needs to be Briony. I think, in all innocence, Briony was protecting Cecilia, her sister whom she loved. For some reason, Briony needed to prove her love for Cecilia, and she proved it to the whole household. Unfortunately, while striving to be a loving sister, she took away a man's freedom.

In a way, Briony seemed to be taking on the mother role. She wanted to save Cecilia, but she also tried to save Lola. I think Briony seems like a child who had to grow up too fast. I think on that night, on the estate, Briony took on her own war effort.

I love war stories too simply because war stories are about sacrifice and bravery. My problem is understanding war strategy. Thank goodness, it was not too hard in Part II of ATONEMENT.

Well, Hats, I guess the juvenile justice system would agree with you—we won’t try her as an adult. But I’d still try her in juvenile court. I think all that rationale about trying to save Cecilia was just so much rationalization. Briony was concerned about Briony in a way only perhaps children can be. When you are older, you are better able to see through your motivations.

Joan, I don’t think forgiveness is part of atonement unless atonement is what allows you to forgive yourself, become "at one" with yourself. Hats, for example, thinks Briony is not guilty, but Briony herself obviously does, and in order to live with herself, she turns to nursing rather than the plummy life of a Cambridge student.

Hats, your comments about interior and exterior are interesting, especially in light of the many views out the windows. Several times McEwan notes how ugly the house is and how beautiful the grounds are, so that looking out of the house you see beauty, but looking back at it, there is this big ugly house. It reminds me of Maupassant’s feeling about the Eiffel Tower: he loved to have lunch on the tower because it was the only place in Paris where he could not see it.

Here is a link to Georgian architecture of the times. Note particularly the description of "Country Houses." There’s also a link to Robert Adam; an Adam-style house had stood where the house their grandfather built was.

There are some things I find not very likeable about Emily: her disregard for her sister’s children, her jealousy/disdain for Cecilia’s education, and her attitude toward Robbie. How can a mother be so callous to those poor kids in the midst of their turmoil over the split-up of their parents? It’s not their fault that their mother is Hermione (whom Emily obviously resents greatly) and they’re in need of some TLC.

Her resentment of Robbie is a puzzlement, also. She seems more resentful of Jack’s interest in Robbie than of his interest in other women, possibly because she sees it as somehow shortchanging their own children. Again, that wasn’t Robbie’s fault, but she takes it out on him. Cecilia said in her letter: "She never forgave you your first." Robbie says, "She had pursued his prosecution with a strange ferocity."

"Wronged child, wronged woman." Well, poor pitiful Emily.

Whoops another Post between this post and the last I read MmeW - my quick read of yours and it appears you also are commenting on Law.

So many great thoughts - yes the 'come back' connecting part one and part two through Cecilia's words - and the fact that everyone needs to Atone hit me also.

I thought Robbie's fantasy of why Briony acted as she did was typical of a guys view where competition seems to be hard wired into their brain because Robbie has no more clue why than any of us, or them, including Briony herself - why! I like the explanation MmeW gave whip themselves into a frenzy of accusations simply because they are getting a lot of attention (and feeding off each other; Briony feeds off her own imagination). Another thought, she missed her father and was not getting as much attention from her mother either - I wonder if it was a way to say 'look what a good girl am I - I am protecting the family status where class is valued and you will notice me as a valued hero so that I can get some attention from Mom and Dad.' Ah so, we can all imagine the rational for Briony's push to convict.

I must say just reading Cecilia's letter to Robbie in the book and a certain sense of tension left me - regardless that legally it would or not happen, it was acknowledging truth.

Joan your question is a good one - Does everyone need forgiveness as part of the "atonement" process? which to me is begging the question who benefits from atonement - the victim or the perpetrator. Is forgiveness and atonement dependent on those polar experiences having a like mind of understanding and compassion. Seems like to atone you have to be aware of your 'sins' so to speak, for want of a better expression. I can see if Briony atones through the courts it would bring Robbie back at-one with society. The fact that he knows, through Cee's letter, that Briony realizes the damage she caused would seem to me to allow Robbie to feel vindicated - at-one with his soul or self-image - that it matched what he had been reacting as the center of his being. He even knew how he would act after the fact as if this gave him back his identity.

Unfortunately there are so many that try to get that personal identity back for themselves through the court system. Justice is not capable of proving a preponderance of moral right to children or, for that matter to those 'less equal' since the legal concept of rights is based on equality. As soon as people shake off the yoke, regaining liberty by the same right as took it away, either they are justified or there was no justification for those who took it away. This right does not come by nature but by law which must be proved.

Children remain attached to the father only so long as they need him for their preservation. When that need ceases, the natural bond dissolves. The first law of man is to provide for his own preservation. He is the means and sole judge of the proper means of preserving himself. The Family is the model of political society with the father corresponding to the ruler. All being born free and equal, their liberty is alienated only for their own advantage, with love for the father the repayment for his care while the State replaces love with a social contract.

I think this whole issue of Robbie blamed and jailed is a larger metaphor - The preservation of the Tallis family, as they knew it, was dependent on a class structure steeped in tradition. Where Robbie was crossing those lines he did not have the status of being a Tallis just as in the army he had the education but not the rank. For the first time he desires his real father who, regardless how the father died or lived, would give Robbie a legitimate claim within a political system - love rather than law defining his value.

The other thought that is new during this reread - I wonder how much the fact that Briony is a child leading the charge and who does unlatch the moral doors that allows her family to crucify Robbie all seems unimaginable because of her age - she seems to be turning the political social hierarchy on its ear - this reminds me of the Cultural Revolution when teenagers and children were slaughtering or jailing the adults because of the adult's attachment to education that was deemed 'against' the state. Children were not only leading the charge but acting as judge and executioners.

HATS I think that is what you are saying when you implore Briony's innocence. Somehow the family system was upside-down. It was as if the adults, both family and state (police) used Briony to close ranks and protect the English class system.

Alf you really picked up on the issue of freedom - it makes me want to put my coat on and take a walk as I contemplate how many cannot enjoy nature or fully use their body because of a lack of freedom. Some because of a war raging around them, others the need to preserve their body is greater and so the search for food, shelter, away from the fear of death denies them freedom, others are jailed by their own body that does not function and still others are incarcerated. This is when even scrubbing a floor is a celebration. Robbie sure saw being captured as internment his soul no longer had the ability to handle.

And Hats I thought that was brilliant - noting that both Emily and Robbie looking inside themselves. McEwan really flushes out these two characters doesn't he.

MmeW great link to the Georgian house - and your reaction to Emily reminds me of what Robbie says during the war - I cannot find the exact quote but something about those who will find out what and who went wrong so the blame can be attached. It was easy to see when chaos rained and there was a lack of leadership someone had to be at fault - the airforce or the 'frogs' (I forgot how the french were disparagingly called frogs) or the offices who wanted to make something out of the desaster by either engaging the enemy once more or another acting important as if tied shoelaces were important. To me that is what Emily was doing - the household leadership was absent and the social fabric of her children's lives were cross grain to anything she experienced as well as having the shock of reading her husbands papers that reduced human life to numbers that could be wiped away with a bomb.

I guess I am reminded of again I do not have it exactly but if you find you are feeling resentful or giving into escaping into indulgance look for the sacrifice. I think Emily felt she had sacrificed her life as a child and would be rewarded but alas, no childhood nor adult reward and so she adapts resentment.

Things that hit me that I had to find the symbolism - trees and legs and feet - he starts his march to the sea with a leg from a child in a tree -

Let me start with the leg - there was the scene where is it Briony who looks through the french door (Hats') windows and sees legs that she realizes are attached to her mother. Then we have the leg in the tree and - of course the legs and feet that propel Robbie to (Joan's) 'Come Back' and - his side hurts whenever he puts his right foot down - The young mother wouldn't stand and he was on his feet - he must limp across the bridge to escape being called back into duty - on the celler floor the weight off his feet an ecstasy of relief spread upward through his knees

Ok so according to J. C. Cooper's An Illustrated Encyclopaedia of traditional Symbols The leg represents firmness and glory. The feet/foot represents freedom of movement; willing service; humility; the lowly. The Knee is the generative force; vitality; strength.

Interesting that Briony sees Emily's disembodied leg, stockinged supported by the knee of the other.

And Robbie gave up his firmeness and glory in order to get across the bridge toward Dunkirk and home - and then on that cement floor when his movement and willing service to his dream of 'Coming back' rests, the ecstasy goes up and relaxes his generative force, vitality and strength.

Now the leg in the tree seemed to have more significance after I looked up tree.

The whole of manifestation; the synthesis of heaven, earth and water; dynamic life as opposed to the static life of the stone.

The Tree in the midst or joining the three worlds and making communication between them possible, giving access to solar power, a world center.

Nurishing; sheltering; protecting; supporting aspects of the Great Mother, the matrix and the power of the inexhaustible and fertilizing waters she controls; Rooted in the depth of the earth, at the world centre, and in contact with the waters, the tree grows into the world of Time, adding rings to manifest its age, and its branches reach the heavens and eternity and also symbolize a World axis.

The tree is associated with the mountain and pillar and all the axial. - There is the Cosmic Tree, Tree of Life, Tree of Knowledge, Trees of Paradise, the Inverted Tree a magic tree, Sephirotic Tree, Tree of Light, Heavenly Tree, Tree of Sweet Dew, Singing Tree, the Great Wisdom Tree - the tree is symbolic of the great awakening.

And so I am wondering if the childs leg in the tree is the symbol for Robbie's great awakening to his firmness and glory.

The other issue with trees is they rest or check their location on their journey near or under trees, they hide, the farmer plowing seeks shelter and safety under the tree but, interesting, the closer they get to the coast there is an absence of trees. Their world center was along the tree line that they followed but, the closer they get to the sea the trees no longer grow.

The sea, the primordial waters, chaos, formlessness, material existence, endless mothion, it is the source of all life, containing all potentials, the sum of all possibilities in manifestation, the anima mundi, the Great Mother, the sea of life which has to be crossed.

The closer to what must be crossed the less protection the less connection with the three worlds of what we call hell or the underworld, the world of men, and the realm of the gods.

OK MmeW you set my curiosity and found an example of an Adam's designed house Isn't Goggle wonderful!

Hmmm. A part of me can not stop feeling sorry for Emily. Emily does have those incapacitating headaches. I think the woman is dealing with secrets, some sort of shame. Perhaps, for the way her husband leads his life. I think some of the blame for the chaos or wrong decisions should be placed on the father's shoulder. It seems, to me, that the girls and women in the household are left to bare more of the decision making and the blame than the men. Emily, Cecilia, Briony, Lola all seem to be the cause of this dreary night. Isn't that always the case in cases of rape? The women bare the blame while the men are somehow exonerated.

Of course, Robbie is not exonerated, but he is put in prison because of Lola, a woman. The women in ATONEMENT seem to be the scapegoats.

Why is the father such an invisible figure? Well, two fathers are never present. Robbie's father is absent and so is Briony and Cecilia's father.

I am going to enjoy and learn from the new links.

Having lived in England (London) 40 years, and studied there immediately after WW2, I felt at home with this book at once. The main thing, to me, is how well written it is.

It seems that Briony, as the fittest, survives with her overdeveloped imagination, having destroyed the lives and loves of others. To recompense, she writes the book. To me, however, entertainment is not recompense, but simply a good 'read".

Ann Playfair

I would say that it was, Lola and Marshall, who survived as the "fittest". They were just as guilty as Briony, in a different way, and apparently, they never suffered a moments guilt or grief. Instead they went on to live a life of luxury, and social prominence.

The final chapter, when Briony accounted for each and every person involved in the tragedy, was so good. A realistic conclusion to the story, because it's a reflection on what life is actually like. There really is no justice, and people don't always live happily ever after.

WELCOME Pompadour & Marilyne ! Glad you both peeked in and hope you share more of your thoughts with us. We have not yet read Part Three or London 1999 and so you are both a bit ahead of us - Some of us have read the entire book and some are reading at the pace we are discussing the book. This week as you can see in the printed schedule above we are still chewing over Part One but we are in the week when we discuss Part Two.

Pompadour we have been reading and seeing many movies and TV programs of Britain WW2 nostalgia within the past 8 or 9 years - as I recall after WW2 Britain had a long recovery, continuing food rations and other war time lifestyles. I wondered if there was as much feeling of pride about their role in WW2 then as there is now - Pompadour have you read any of McEwan's other books?

Marilyne your thoughts are intriguing - I think at this point in the book it is difficult for us to observe a 'fit' Briony but your thought will certainly be on our minds as we read further. Interesting that you use the word Tragedy to describe the events in the story - did you pick up any other theme I wonder - had you thought through what you feel Atonement means for yourself and society today? Marilyne we would love to hear your thoughts about Atonement and also Forgiveness. Some of us are comfortable believing that Forgiveness is part of Atonement. What works for you?

Whoops Alf we are posting at about the same time and only now saw your comment - ah so - sounds like you have also completed the read and share the same opinion about these characters as Marilyne. Can't wait till next week when we share our overall opinions as a result of having read the entire story.

Joan sorry you ran late today...it is hard not to respond immediately after reading the posts isn't it - I had to discipline myself today - an early morning meeting in pouring down rain - good thing I left the house when I did.

I wondered if Emily was both embarrassed by her sister getting a divorce when it was still not a socially acceptable thing to do and also, that she was not happy in her marriage but was sticking it out without leaning on family for support and so why couldn't her sister do the same - especially this sister that she feels received all the attention while they were growing up - What do you think?

Hats I understand what you are saying about Emily - I remember reading a book once called The Good Mother which reminded me of Emily - no one is her support and alone she seems to be handling as best she can more than her share of the responsibilities - I do not get that any of her needs are being met.

There is an ironic joke I remember about a boy who hated his piano lessons and was told when he had children he could decide if his children would or not take lessons. The boy's angry remark was that for sure his children would take lessons since he had to, they would learn to suffer as well. Where Emily's girls are not following in her footsteps. She certainly does not understand or feel good that she had to suffer her kind of education and growing up and her girls are experiencing a very different childhood and yet they do not seem to have any worthwhile goals. She may sound like she is complaining but in the 1930s I do not see much choice for her. I get the impression she is supposed to keep up the look of success on the estate but probably without the resources to do it easily since we know the place is not in good repair. I get the impression there is not the extra funds that would allow her to have fun with friends in London or own a stable of horses to relieve her of the monotony. hehehe she almost sounds like the complaints from some of the Royals today who are not gifted in breaking out of their box of restrictions. None of them were fans of Diana who did go ahead and take the wrathe of the queen and others in the Royal household as she broke free of her box.

OK back to the book - what was that bit all about the Bees - it does not seem to be tied to anything and yet all of a sudden during their march to the sea they are attacked by bees. I looked up the Bee in my book of symbols and I still do not get a connection -

Immortality; rebirth; industry; order; purity; a soul. Bees signified virginity and chastity; often represent the stars and are also winged messengers carrying news to the spirit world. The bee never sleeping is regarded as Christian vigilance and zeal. Flying in the air, it is the soul entering the Kingdom of Heaven. - now other definitions are about the Queen Bee and those Emblems that feature a bee

The bees in Atonement were simply swarming in a certain area that they had to walk through. An author like McEwan wouldn't include something just for the heck of it and so what is the reason for the Bees I wonder...

Hi Barbara,

I remember reading about the bees and knew those bees were put in the plot for a reason. I have to admit being totally boggled by the bee anecdote. Then, after you, Barbara, brought the bees up again, I am thinking that the chemical message that one bee would send out causing all the other bees to come give their life reminded me of the way the whole family marches quickly forward to Briony and Lola's aide. Briony heard Lola's chemical message loudly and clearly that she had been attacked.

Then, the message spreads from Briony to the others. Briony is saying, I need your willingness to forget whatever you believe and help me convict and destroy this beast of a man, Robbie. Briony wanted her family to take her words on faith, and they do accept her words on total faith. Briony's words cause the family to swarm around, and they die too because each family member has taken on a loss cause, the cause being to convict an innocent man.

Thank you, Joan. Now, I am looking at war strategy in a more "simplistic" way. I gain more from reading about the war effort if I look at as a way of surviving.

Joan, Altitude 95—I’m so jealous! We had several lovely meals there (one on Christmas Eve) when it had its other name (La Belle France?).

I completely agree about the "sins of the fathers" (or mothers, in Hermione’s case). I wonder if Jack’s interest in Robbie wasn’t due to his seeing something in Robbie that Leon lacked, drive or whatever, that he identified with. Leon seemed like a nice guy, but not too bright (he totally missed Cecilia’s literary references to Clarissa and the miracle at the feast), pretty phlegmatic and kind of useless. And since Jack had such an eye for the ladies, it made it easier for him to believe Briony’s accusation.

Marilyne, very good point! Yes indeed, the irony of it all: Lola and Paul emerged quite unscathed from all this, didn’t they, what with Paul’s contribution to the war being Amo and all the public acknowledgment of their good works. (I didn’t want to wait two days to say this—I’d forget it)

Barbara, I must disagree—I don’t think Emily was handling any of her responsibilities. Granted, it was due to her migraines, but she had pretty much resigned and turned motherly responsibilities over to Cecilia. That’s why they called her Emily, rather than mother. In the kitchen, "the dilemma was familiar enough: how to keep the peace and not humiliate her mother." The children "felt obliged to protect her from seeming ineffectual."

Who was it who called Briony back from her nightmares? Cecilia: "Briony had always required mothering from her older sister." Cecilia says she’s going a little mad here, and Leon responds: "Being everyone’s mother again." Emily thinks a lot about finding Briony and comforting her, but in the end, Briony comes back to the house on her own.

Certainly in a crisis, she’s not good. When the boys disappear, Leon says to call the constable and she stands at the phone thinking about why she shouldn’t. She stands, "irresolutely," in the hall, trying to hear the voices of the searchers, "relieved" that she doesn’t. Leon is on the phone with Jack, and she "would have preferred to retreat upstairs to her room." Leon leads her to the drawing room, where she can sit down to hear the news: "Come on, Emily."

And to Cecilia, her mother seemed "distant, even unfriendly," when she took her tea in an attempt to foster some kind of dialogue. She treated her children like pets, loving to cuddle their warm bodies, but when they outgrew that, she couldn’t relate to them. And perhaps, as Hats suggested, resented their freedom, though she says she’s not unhappy.

Hats, to me Briony is the first bee, stinging Robbie, compelling the others to sting him also. Cecilia is the queen bee, who does not participate because she only stings rival queens. An interesting aside, only female bees have poison glands and a sting.

I think the men are victims.

Joan: No one ever believed those little boys did this. I agree. Why would the little boys hurt Lola so? (and why would she let them? I could beat up my little brothers when they were that age!) Plus Paul also had a scratch "running parallel to his nose" at dinner. The only one who confirmed her story was Paul (said he threw them off of her), and it was only recounted when the boys were not present to deny it.

Actually it was Lola whose "unblemished incisors" cracked the Amo bar, just before the twins were called to their bath, leaving Lola and Paul alone in the nursery.

Another irony: Emily hears "a squeal of laughter abruptly smothered" from the nursery and thinks, "This wealthy young entrepreneur might not be such a bad sort, if he was prepared to pass the time of day entertaining children."

Despite some red herrings pointing to Danny Harding, I’m inclined to think it’s Paul. He went ahead searching by himself with Cecilia and Leon trailing behind; he returned by himself and "learned the news from the inspectors."

The only man I see as a victim is Robbie, and by extension then Cecilia.

There was another insect section that has puzzled me: the moths who are drawn to a light because of "the visual impression of an even deeper darkness beyond the light." Emily preferred not to have the mystery explained: "Not everything had a cause…. Some things were simply so." Any ideas?

It’s one more example of Emily’s head-in-the-sand routine, for she goes on to say she doesn’t want to know about Jack’s work at the ministry, dire predictions of how many millions would be killed by how many tons of bombs.

Just back from an over-night in Collage Station to see my youngest and his family - then on Tuesday I leave for my Daughter's in Saluda NC and so I will be out of pocket all day Tuesday while flying - On the drive over to Collage Station it was fun seeing all the fireworks stands setting up for Christmas - interesting, like other retail the stands are bigger, more decorated but fewer in number. The small front yard stands seem to be a thing of the past.

Hats the explanation for the bee bit makes sense to me - I am wondering now since I didn't while reading just how much chapter two was a dialogue with chapter one - The tone was so different - rat tat tat - as if speaking out of breath discribing one atrocity after the next - but there were many shadow experiences that furthered the events of chapter one in a different setting and with a wider family. Just as I said that to my self I Realize how Robbie and pals observed others and had very few intimate exchanges along the way. In war I guess I would have expected as much - as Joan said 'war is all about survival' - but it shadows or highlights the distance between the family members.

Everyone seems to work in threes in this book. Robbie and his two comrades in arms - in chater one most instances involve three - I wonder if this three is symbolic - like three hanging on the Cross - and the Christmas story has lots of threes - I am not as familiar with the Jewish religious stories (old Testament) to know if there are instances of three that are memorable. I seldom heard about Atonement but a lot about the 'forgiveness of sins' and therefore, I have thought of the word Atonement to be from the Jewish tradition. Certainly when you go to the 'net' invariably you find information on Atonement on a Jewish web page.

MmeW interesting observation about the difference between Leon and Robbie - that could be why Jack continued his support - working in a highly secret government office with his numbers etc. sounds like he admired diligence which could explain why he was not being more of an aid to Cecilia and as you have pointed out Emily was anything but diligent. I still think when a wife is abandoned she goes into her own shell and works from unconscious habits instilled when she was a child - without this becoming a psych class - Emily's upper class upbringing did not include much teenage parental attention if she was shipped off to Switzerland to attend school. There were probably nannies when she was young. This snuggling time may be one step forward toward family intimacy that she did not experience.

Joan to me bruses and scratches can easily be had while rolling around in the out-of-doors and the ones she got while in the nursery - we really do not know what happened except for what Briony (according to McEwan in Part One) the author of this story is telling us. That is why I thought your question about who was the narrator interesting - McEwan says this is Briony's book and yet, there are many times Briony could not know what is shared in the book - which makes for an interesting London 1999

Gotta run - be back later with a few more thoughts...

Barbara, atonement theology is intrinsic to the Christian doctrine that Christ died for our sins, simplistically put (which also brings to mind the scapegoat idea, which Robbie certainly was). There are differing interpretations of atonement in that context, however. Was Christ being punished instead of us or was God showing us how it should be done (living and suffering)? (Keep in mind that I'm no theologian.)

Yet I discovered that the word comes from a word meaning "to cover" and is used many times in the Old Testament and not at all in the New. (It was in one translation and then corrected to "reconciliation.")

Just to change the subject, I think as far as we know Part One is omniscient narrator.

I don't know why I have so little to say about Part Two. It must be important, but...

I wonder if both the women and men aren't the victims in ATONEMENT. It might be possible that all of them were victims of that period in history. During that period, I would think, whether female or male you were placed in a pigeon hole an expected to stay there. At least, men could go off to war and release their pent up rage. Emily had nowhere to release her "rages" so, she suffered with painful headaches.

In the war, Robbie had a buddy system, but Emily does not seem to have any friends. She is all alone accept for her children. This is off the subject, but do we learn much of anything about Leon, the brother? I had forgotten all about him.

MmeW, I remember reading about the moth. I didn't know what it meant, but I knew it was important.

MmeW yes, the word Atonement is not one I remember bandied about in Christian Doctorine and that is why I thought of the Jewish Religion. The concept is there within Christianity - I think we may all have a slightly different concept of both Atonement and Forgiveness...

To me there is some behavior so unforgiveable that I cannot muster any reconciliation. I've had a hard time with even forgiveness - what I have learned that has allowed me to move on is that Forgiveness does not have to include reconciliation - it can simply be a letting go of all the rage or hurt or numbness, to untie yourself from how I thought things were supposed to be and put it/those who have injured, destroyed others, in the hands of God - to not wish them ill or well - simply detach and realize as Blake said, God made the lamb and the Tyger therefore, let God deal with the Tyger on His terms.

As to Atonement I can see, quietly, without fan fair, making amends by doing whatever you are capable of doing to right or make better who you have hurt - but, to do that in a way that is asking for forgiveness is asking for something for yourself - asking for the victim of your abuse for one more act that will make you feel better - therefore to me Atonement is something that the perpetrator acts on with no thought of becoming one with the victim but simply doing what can be done to allow the victim to become at one with what has been damaged or taken - his body, his property, his good name, his soul etc.

So for me both the acts of forgiving and atoning do not require acknowledgement by the other party, but in the case of atoning definitly the performance of a behavior that affects the injuried party. To do a mia culpa, if that is what Briony is affecting when she becomes a nurse, I did not see as an act of Atonement - had she known then that Robbie died in France than it could work as atonement with Briony assisting those who were Robbie's comrades in arms. (Here I am also jumping the gun - but this story has its greatest impact in the last chapters doesn't it)

I need to go back and find the page where McEwan says this is Briony's novel...because to me that had set me up for a big reaction in the last chapter.

We each get something different out of our reads - for me the memory I had of Part Two, even completing this second read, I come away with the same impact - when things go badly there seems to be a general hue and cry to choose someone to pin the blame. Thinking on that I realize no one wants to feel bad and if whatever is wrong is not someone elses fault than we look to ourselves and blame ourselves. Blame, even self blame is easier to handle than accepting the loss.

Seems we have a hard time living with the pain of failure or loss or whatever the pain filled experience; quickly, some turn this pain into blame, where as others turn it on themselves and we have depression. They say women are not given permission by society to show their anger or rage and therefore easily turn their pain and hurt into depression. All anger and rage is - is a cover for hurt and pain - if only, the hurt of realizing life is not what we imagined or what we were taught to expect. (I love the writings of St. John of the Cross and Lao Tzu about all of this)

Hats I think you hit on it...whether female or male you were placed in a pigeon hole an expected to stay there. At least, men could go off to war and release their pent up rage. Emily had nowhere to release her "rages" so, she suffered with painful headaches. Although I just hate it that McEwan is writing Emily's headaches as the symptom of her emotional life since Migraine's are real and maybe exasperiated by stress but are not caused by stress - alluding to her headaches as if she conviently can escape from the life around her continues the age old issue of treating Migraines as a sympton of the mind.

But to go on, it seems to me depression is what we see in Emily as well as in Cecilia. In fact the only one who shows anger and rage is Robbie's mother and the troops who want to blame the airman for their ragged defeat in France. Come to think of it the French mother of the farmer boys is stuck in anger left from WW1 - the characters that do not seem to show either depression or anger are Briony, Lola and Marshall - and so maybe that is why some readers discribe them as the "fittist."

OK folks this is it! From here on out we will assume you have read the entire book and therefore posts will most probably reflect all that we learn not only in Part Three but in London 1999 as well. Not that many pages as compared to Part One but they are loaded and our reactions may be varied. I'll be back later - full day of seeing clients before I leave for the holidays.

What an irony between Amo (amo, amas, amat) and the real-life ammo that Robbie must dodge. And the men arriving at the hospital covered with all the "essential elements" of the battlefield, including sodden crumbs of Amo bars in their pockets.

And I had to laugh at the nurses carrying piles of bedpans "like a busy waiter at La Coupole," another of my favorite Paris restaurants, and I could just picture it.

At the hospital, Briony certainly retains some of her youthful romanticism and flair for drama. She occasionally feels "moments of elated, generalised love," and can imagine giving up her writing for nursing. When she wakes in the morning, it is with an awareness of "excitement" in store. "Waking as a child on Christmas day was like this—the sleepy thrill, before remembering its source. … She could not prevent or deny her horrible exhilaration." Even being on the job did not "dim this heightened perception."

To give her credit, though, I remember Andy Rooney in a documentary on WWII, saying that he had never felt so alive as when he covered the war.

The vase: I see a real problem with reality and the vase. As told in Part One, Briony did not realize that the vase had broken; she imagined Cecilia had jumped into the fountain on a threat from Robbie. Emerging from the fountain, Cecilia picks up a vase of flowers "Briony had not noticed before."

The letter of rejection from the publisher, however, suggests: "Wouldn’t it help you if the watching girl did not actually realise that the vase had broken?" So Briony has revised her original manuscript to include this suggestion, and she knew all along.

I found this interesting bit about the vase in a Guardian website that has links to reviews and articles by McEwan, including one immediately following 9/11:

In Part One, there is a significant tussle between Cecilia and Robbie by the fountain, for a precious Meissen vase, given to an uncle in the First World War by the French villagers whom he had saved. The vase is broken, but mended so that the cracks hardly show (another literary bow, this time to The Golden Bowl). Just so, in Briony's accusation, 'the glazed surface of conviction was not without its blemishes and hairline cracks'.

In war-time, one of the servants breaks it irrecoverably. The 'making one' of the vase was a fix, and couldn't hold.

Just a comment: I loved this inversion, or whatever you want to call it. The reading room of the Imperial War Museum is in the former chapel of Bedlam, the mental hospital, and McEwan says: "Where the unhinged once came to offer their prayers, scholars now gather to research the collective insanity of war."

McEwan wrote an article about his mother that makes me envision her as Grace Turner, simple English, helping Molly with a chat, salt of the earth. But then he went on to describe the dementia that afflicts her, Briony’s future:

It is 1994, still many years to go before the first signs of the vascular dementia that is currently emptying her mind.

Soon all her memories will be gone. Even the jumbled ones – her mother, the house in Ash with the plum tree in the garden. It's a creeping death. Soon she won't know me or Margy or Roy. As the dementia empties her memory, it will begin to rob her of speech. Already there are simple nouns that elude her. The nouns will go, and then the verbs. And after her speech, her co-ordination, and the whole motor system. I must hang on to the things she says, the little turns, the phrases, for soon there will be no more.

Just a peek in - I'm doing so much today - no time but had to peek in and what fab posts - I love the reminder MmeW - the insanity of war tra la bit - and Joan this book grabs you - I do not see Atonement at all and the end is a question mark - it sure gets you thinking though as to your own definition of Atonement and how we measure others that are professing Atonement - This is a book that is hard to comment on until you have completed the read and it takes the strength of Theseus not to discuss this twisted storytelling experience. The next few days should be an interesting exchange of not only Atonement but the construction of a plot and what are the themes especially in relationship to the twisted plot.

Wow that is a strong statement isn't it - unforgivable - this is where Christian ethics runs through your head - certainly Robbie in Part Two didn't sound like forgiveness wasn't going to be an avenue he planning to walk.

I was further intrigued by pages 262 and 263 where Betty drops the vase - Emily in her letters tells about the taking apart of as Briony puts it - a long-lost life.

The arm and horn (conch shell) of the Tritone is broken off the statue and the mother of the evacuated family is fierce in her sons defence. - The emblem of Poseidon/Neptune and Triton - Triton blows conch shells while drawing the the chariot of Poseidon.

Most interesting to me, this whole bit about a lost lifestyle is coming from Emily - she seems to emblem that furthers the idea that she led her life with one foot in the past and the other foot not knowing how to cope with the present.

Also a biggie Briony began a journal she rarely read back over what she had written, but she liked to flip the filled pages. Here, behind the name badge and uniform, was her true self, secretly hoarded, quietly accumulating...It almost didn't matter what she wrote. I think this says a lot about Briony - not very deep, theatrical, she is more interested in volume than intrespection. Oh yes, and ownership - secret ownership - hmmm accumulating power secretly.

Then later on page 277 Briony was sent about her business. The ward could do without disciplinarians like her. Was that Robbie and Cecilia's problem for Briony - they were not acting according to her concept of etiquette.

Fun how McEwan says Lola's 'white shape' huddled against the driver's arm and it was a 'black shape' that Briony saw move away from Lola that fatefilled night.

I never understood what the the disagreeable landlady was all about - it didn't seem to go anywhere - she was simply an unpleasent sort - but why was she an issue to bring into the story at all I wonder.

Now I must really reread London 1999 During my first read this is where I was stopped dead in my tracks and couldn't finish the book for several days - I could have cared less about any of the characters - McEwan really threw me a curve that took me days to get beyond. Learning more about post-modern literature was my saving grace. Kafka...!

MmeW the wonderful Guardian link is now in the heading. Ok I will be out of pocket now until Wednesday. I'm off in the morning -

P.S. the soldiers it would appear are annoited if we turn to symbolism - Oil: Consecration; dedication; spiritual illumination; mercy; fertility. - Sand: Instability; impermanence. In Islam sand signifies purity since it is used for ritual ablutions when no water is available.

An interesting use of the word oil or oily is how Briony describes the hatred Marshall has for her and Cecilia - first why does he hate them?? - But oily hatred is a dedicated hate isn't it.

This link may be worth exploring upon reading London 1999. Critical Theory and Post Modern Thought

When Briony tells Robbie she is sorry, "very, very sorry," her words don't come across or are not accepted. "It sounded so foolish and inadequate, as though she had knocked over a favorite hourseplant, or forgotten a birthday." Those words really left a lump in my throat. My parents taught me that saying "sorry" could cover all my mistakes. I, in turn, taught my boys the same thing.

The movie 'Love Story' comes to mind. I missed the movie and the book, but I remember these words, from the movie, were alway spoken, "Love means never having to say your sorry." I never really understood what that meant. Now, I think it must mean that if our love is deep, that forgiveness is automatic, the word "sorry" becomes irrelevant.

I think another theme of this book is forgiveness. At least, I am thinking a lot about who I have forgiven and not forgiven.

Upon this second read - knowing what to expect - I wondered what my reaction would be - this time rather than feeling so outraged and betrayed - confused if any of the characters and their story had a place in my mind or heart - feeling like a pin was stuck in my balloon - this time it reminded me of being a kid at the movie and some of the older boys saying 'it was only a movie' as we would get so emotionally wound up discussing the story with fierce arguments on the way home, who in the movie was right, who was wrong, what really happened on and on.

Yes, every novel is only a story but they are usually written to draw you in so that the reader takes a stand or, approves of certain characters to the point of not only liking or disliking them but to see them in our heads as real.

With this unreliable author how much of any of this book is real. In order for the story line to grab attention in today's world it would have to be based on more than a simple love story with young love going off to war. McEwan sure chose a topic that gets a lot of attention today - the twist being the old fashioned idea that so many men have maintained that girls make up lies to ruin their reputations and therefore, the law needs to be as difficult, as it continues to be, for a child victim to be equal under the law and therefore unequal in the childs ability to bring forward the truth when confronted and freightened by the adult cross examination. This story twisted that scenerio so that Briony, the observer, not the victim although a child was really ruining a man's reputation. Alluding that Marshall raped Lola and then she marries him makes me so uncomfortable again the age old 'she liked it' or 'wanted it.'

The idea of an author seeking atonement because they have twisted a story or created out of bits and pieces of reality a story seems to me to minimize the intent of Atonement - but then by not seeking or expecting atonement for the twisting of a story is saying we do not put much faith in a novel and therefore, if we learn the whole thing is a pack of lies we can't be upset since that is all a novel is...a story...even a myth is a story with more truth and is more consistent.

The other indication that McEwan must have a differnt understanding of Atonement than the one I subscribe is on page 330 when he has Briony writing a letter to her parents, Robbie etc. that is to be an atonement. This is not my understanding or definition of Atonement. A letter could be an apologie, a self flagging for the sin but I do not think words can ever make a victim feel better. Now words spoken in public denying the role a victim was accused of playing, that I can buy as atonement, but just a letter doesn't cut it to me. You can grovel till kingdom comes but that does not wipe away the experience, the pain, the loss, the betrayal on and on that a victim experiences.

We never learn what really happened to Lola - if it really was Marshall - if he really raped her or if she wanted to feel grown-up - of course with their age difference even if she wanted to experience grown up sex he should have been the mature grown up and made sure nothing happened - or did Marshall protect her and she was raped by Danny - we will never know. But then we can be the author as much as Briony and make up any scenerio that suits our fancy. Of course we could have fun with his name Mar-sh-all - he mars in secret everyone. And Rob-bie - robbed be...

I know I feel deflated and annoyed that I had put out so much emotion judging this one and that one in the story, as if it really mattered. I felt like as long as it doesn't matter why not just go for the light romance or 'who done it' or swashbuckling war story by one of our authors that pump them out by the dozens.

I will be interested to learn what you thought of the ending - what you thought of McEwan's ideas on Atonement - what did this book really say to you? Do you like being reminded that a novel is only a made-up story.

Well, At the end, I felt angry. Like Pilate said, "what is truth?" When I finished the book, I didn't like Briony. I felt angry because she made me believe so many lies or falsehoods. I believed that she went to see Robbie and Cecilia that day. I felt very moved by the whole scene. I believed her lie. Now, I feel gullible. Then again, does my gullibility prove that Briony is a true novelist, worth her salt?

Maybe McEwan wrote this book to come to terms with what he thinks a novelist can and can't do. Perhaps, McEwan battles with his ability to weave tales. Is there truth in his tales? Has he so destroyed the character of real people that he feels, the need to make atonement or ask forgiveness from their God? I think the book is a personal treatise.

Hats, that's an interesting thought...that McEwan has issues but he writes..."for God and novelists - NO ATONEMENT."

Have you ever read his Amsterdam? I've always intended to...it would be fun to contrast themes, don't you think?

Joan, I would love to read 'Amsterdam.' This is my first novel by McEwan.

Interesting Joan you believe that something really did happen, that the young Briony misinterpreted that reality...spent her life attempting to come to terms with what she did, but each time her imagination intervened to come up with the happy ending.

Where as Hats asks "What is Truth"...didn't like Briony. I felt angry because she made me believe so many lies or falsehoods. I believed that she went to see Robbie and Cecilia that day. I felt very moved by the whole scene. I believed her lie. Now, I feel gullible. Then again, does my gullibility prove that Briony is a true novelist, worth her salt?

I guess I lean towards the feelings shared by Hats First whatever went on between Lola and Marshall we can only guess at since whatever it is Briony as an author is not able to share because she risks a law suite - and so anything about Lola and Marshall's contribution to Robbie's internment is in question - there is talk of a dozen drafts of the book written over a period of 59 year - she only decided that a crime would be part of the story from the second draft onward, leading me to believe the basic story line is just that, a made up happening. May have even been based on the suggestions she received when she brought that first 103 typewritten story to a publisher, leading me to believe the only thing that happened was the fountain scene when the vase cracked.

Symbolically that works for me - as Tritone blows the conch driving Poesiden's chariot like Briony's imagination being driven by the words in the letter that gave her imagination the direction needed to be published.

Then she refers to the lovers, Cecilia and Robbie as similar to her childhood play The Trials of Arabella - she says there was a crime and there was lovers - well OK but is that more of an author playing God - can we visit the War Museum in London and find the letters as written by a Cecilia Tallis and is there an inn someplace that was the country house of the Tallis family - and when it comes down to it does it matter since this is a novel and not a 'non-fiction' book or a book based on reality.

Yes, authors use history, accurate history at that, but to make the story they weave seem the more real so we will emotionally attach ourselves to the characters. The idea of letting us know the story is ficiton within the limits and the terms set by the author is like being told there is no Santa Clause when we still believed and want to believe. The whole concept of Christmas changes after you know that Santa Clause is a myth. When the character Briony is saying in the last bit that she will act kind as a stand against ovblivion and despair to let the lovers live and for her character not to be forgiven, when we know that Briony is also a made up character, that McEwan is the author the realization is for me overwhelming - and yet, confusing to sort out since Briony is a character not the real author - but I was so annoyed, that was it, as Hats says gullible I suspended reality and trusted the story teller - I didn't expect that trust was going to be shown up by taking it down and shaking it in the face of method, story telling choices.

I felt like - if you, McEwan can weave a story using these characters, a crime and lovers than I can weave a story and so why not just print out a list of characters, some characteristics for each character, outline the crime and the various scenes, time and place in history and then we can all make up our own story. I feel like he pulled back the curtain and shows us how the wonderment and beauty of the performance was created by letting us see all the stage hands and pullies and light switches etc. And so rather than leaving the theatre enchanted we have a journyman's knowledge of how the stage production was created.

For me this is like reading all this, getting my emotions involved and all the time I was running in place since it was all conjecture and that is why this reminds me of Kafka's The Castle where no matter what the main character does he never really gets his interview in the Castle.

And yet, I can see holding on to some of the story as Joan says and Briony says - there was a crime and there were lovers - I think I feel so betrayed that the wonderment of the well written story is uncovered that I am willing to throw the Baby out with the pan of water. Joan you sound like those older boys from my youth that would remind us that it was only a movie and therefore they could accept and talk about the bits of the movie story without fear, anger etc. etc. and share their opinion about what they observed where as others of us only had opinions based on the characters being real as if they were neighbors that we had to decide if they were friend or foe worthy of our support of no.

Hehehe I guess I still want to believe in Santa Clause and feel empty when told he is a fantasy carried out by others or, a story is a fantasy carried out by an author. Where oh where do I place my trust and when do I suspend my belief and trust without being betrayed.

Now that I have had a good wail - Joan seems to me we discussed Amsterdam here on seniornet - a very different story and the construction of it reminded me of Virginia Woolf. I had a contemporary setting and a death that took place in the north of England along a hiking trail - I would have to flip through the book again to remember the story line. But it would be fun to look at and compare to see if there is any similarities in construction.

Yes, Barbara, we discussed Amsterdam here back in 1999. I was the discussion leader, but darned if I can remember anything about the book!

I am truly loving Atonement, but haven't had the opportunity to follow this discussion. Holiday rush at work, of course!

Well here is the link to the archieved pages - what happened to all the graphics on the archived pages I wonder

sysop "Amsterdam ~ Ian McEwan ~ 6/99 ~ Prized Fiction" 12/1/02 4:01am

Many of the Archived discussions during '99 had the graphics removed to save space on SeniorNet... Now we have more storage capacity and can include the important graphics of a discussion when it is archived.

Thanks Pat for explaining what happened

Thanks for the link!! Barbara, thanks for leading the discussion.

HAPPY HOLIDAYS!!!

all your posts with interest. There are many different ways to enjoy a story, and what we take from a story often depends on what we bring to it.

The posts with references to other literature are enlightening, but since I do not have that information in my experience, I approached the story differently.

I see Briony as an eternal lurker: on other people, on the garden, and really in her own life. At the end, she is doing just what she did many years ago---lurking and spying on others.

The sense I made of the story line was this: Lola and Paul Marshall were necking in the nursery--hence the scratches. Later they had a sexual encounter of some kind, and Briony caught them....Robbie got blamed. (He was an easy scapegoat because of his lack of social standing).

The story Briony writes which cannot be published tells the truth. Robbie died at Dunkirk and Cecelia was killed in the bombing...

The kicker to me is that Briony cannot get the story published, as no publisher is willing to risk the lawsuit while the Marshalls are still alive. And she hasn't got the guts to publish it privately.

To me she is a child--unloved--who tries to make a life by imagining things, and goes too far. But she never grows up, and at the end (p 336) while she is observing the Marshalls from underneath her umbrella), she says, "However withered, I still feel myself to be exactly the same person I've always been."

And after living life really only in her head, she is going to lose her mind gradually before she dies.......no atonement, but fate surely is strong with retribution.

And the Marshalls (who to me represent the segments of society which profit from war and armaments and violence and lust and greed and amorality)-- they live on in tottering wealth and luxury.

Hahaha I love it Catbird...no atonement, but fate surely is strong with retribution. You nailed it -

What I wonder is, how did you react to being told that the story is created bit by piece over a period of years with much of the story added for affect so that it became a marketable novel. And that except for the tussel in the fountain we do not know what is real - the words that the crime is real and there are lovers does not outline the exactness of the crime nor if the crime had a scapegoat. Those who have critiqued the book have all spoken about this twist but they have all been wonderful about not tipping what the twist is all about. What did you think?

Happy Holidays Hats so glad you joined us - I love your synopsis Has he (McEwan) so destroyed the character of real people that he feels, the need to make atonement or ask forgiveness from their God? I think the book is a personal treatise. I never thought of it from that point of view but it sure feels less like a betrayal when you think that the author himself had issues that he had to work out.

It is a beautiful day here in the mountains and the children are off from school as of noontime and so the idea that the major part of this discussion will be completed by tomorrow fits so well into this holiday season...the discussion will be opened for any and all remarks through the end of the month - so if you have anymore insights this site will be here and I will continue to peek in from time to time - please feel comfortable continuing a conversation about the book without seeing a post from me --

Hi, all! I have been missing in action for a while, mainly due to the holiday flurry, but also because I just couldn’t think of any terrific insights. In a way, I felt like Hats and Barbara, kind of betrayed by the ending, though I do like that part of Briony’s atonement consists of resuscitating her victims, possibly even rewriting to make them alive at the 1999 birthday party, thus allowing them to live forever.

But it was just so hard for me to get a grasp on the work as a whole, and what McEwan was doing, so I searched again for a critical interpretation that might clue me in and found a wonderful one by B. H. Finney. It is long and dense, but well worth the reading. Here are a couple of excerpts:

Five years later Briony realizes that what caused her to write Robbie into her story as a villain was both an excess of imagination and a failure of imaginative projection (into the other). Writing about the terrorist attacks of September 11 2001 for the Guardian, McEwan observed, "If the hijackers had been able to imagine themselves into the thoughts and feelings of the passengers, they would have been unable to proceed. [. . .] Imagining what it is like to be someone other than yourself is at the core of our humanity" (Cremins 19). This belief lies at the core of all McEwan's fiction and explains its apparent amoral stance (a stance that the mature writer, Briony, comes to share once she has learnt the need to respect the autonomy of others in her work). He has said that for him novels are not about "teaching people how to live but about showing the possibility of what it is like to be someone else. …

The writing of Atonement, which vividly imagines a reunion of Cecilia with Robbie after his return from Dunkirk (where in fact he died), is the form that Briony's atonement takes. It is a fictional and imaginative attempt to do what she failed to do at the time — project herself into the feelings and thoughts of these others, to grant them an authentic existence outside her own life's experiences, to conjure up what it must have felt like for the wounded Robbie to participate in the retreat to Dunkirk, and for Cecilia to be forcibly separated from him and estranged from her family. She recognizes that such an act of atonement "was always an impossible task," that the "attempt was all" (351). Yet, as McEwan said to one interviewer, "When this novel is published [after her death . . .] these two lovers will survive to love, and they will survive — spontaneous, fortuitous Cecilia and her medical prince — right out of the little playlet she was trying to write at the age of thirteen. They will always live."

Well, I have to get to packing! My best wishes for a happy new year to all!

I just joined Senior Net and may want to participate in a book discussion group. I note that you read Atonement in December; this book has been sitting by my chair for some time and your discussion group may prompt me to read it. I started it some time ago but found it very slow in the beginning. How does one determine what books will be read during the rest of 2003? Since I do not live in the US, it may take me a while to order books.

WELCOME georgehd so glad you found us...since we usually vote on the majority of the books we choose to read there are usually selections in the section called 'Looking for readers' that may become up-coming selections provided there are enough readers posting their interest in the book. Although we have some selections for the months ahead determained, the entire year is not scheduled until later in the spring or early summer. As of now there are a few books listed that are the next group to be discussed. georgehd if there are some titles you would like to suggest please post those suggestions for us to add to some of those suggestions made by others posting.

And yes, we found Atonement started off rather slowly like a minuet of characters as compared to the remaining half of the book which moves along with drama at the pace of post WW2. MmeW found and shared a wonderful link to a critique on the book that is one of the best and most thorough I've ever read. It needs to go in the heading it is so thorough.

Joan you ask an interesting question...for me the worst was realizing during war human compassion is not protection and Robbie's inability to move the frightened mother and child, who was in a state of shock, from the field and the mother's only ability left in life was to comfort her child although it ment their death. That and how easily soldiers can turn on their own when they feel defeated as they did in the bar at Dunkirk.

I'm not sure how much 'good' I conceived seeing how evil takes from good and how those we consider heros easily turn to their evil side - for me it was just one more chalk-up to how evil and good exist side by side and how most behavior is in response to a preceding action.

I often muse and wonder, where does it all begin this concept of 'evil' versus 'good' as if evil acts are only committed by evil people and good is what most of us really are?!? I also resent the consept that I should have been astute enough to realize this book although sold as a piece of fiction was really a text on how to write a novel. For me that was the real zinger. The author asking me to suspend my reality for his and then says at the end he was toying with the reality he conceived that was the story. The Finney article sounds like someone trying to justify betrayal in the name of sophisticated readership.

Thank you to all the participants in this discussion. The discussion is being archived and is now Read Only.