Report on Sputnik Sweetheart, from the publishers.

The strengths:

The novel picks up on the big questions in life, and hence expands the readers’ minds. For example when K explores the limitations of self evaluation; how can you look at yourself from an objective position? Is it possible? Do people think that they’re doing it when they’re actually not? The novel explores the concept of identity, and how major events can 'split' one; this notion takes on a surreal perspective in the novel, where the characters are literally split into pieces, when Miu is in the Ferris wheel and sees herself in a different place. This is an extremely exciting and very post modern way of looking life-changing events. I particularly liked the style in which these ideas were narrated, through self-confessed unstable narrator K.

I also liked the way in which relationships were developed in the novel particularly that between K and Sumire, the desperateness of K’s love compared to Sumire’s naive concept of friendship, completely oblivious to K’s feelings. The way in which K describes his love for Sumire struck me, he sees love as a necessity rather than a luxury, showing some of his character and leading the readers to warm to him in sympathy.

Murikami’s description of the character’s conversation within the novel is encapsulating. The way in which the scenes are painted is magical, for example when K and Sumire meet to talk at the lake and K talks about the ancient Chinese ritual of gate building, before this the conversation is wonderful, it is so natural, which is nice to see in a novel, it feels real. I think that the end of the novel is one of its strengths; it could end very badly, this would’ve been an easy ending. However it would not have been in keeping with the feel of the novel, because so much of the book is left to the readers to come to a decision about, it is not given to the readers on a plate. They have to work to understand the novel, in their own way. This is also, I think, one of the main strengths of the novel; it is a different book for everyone who reads it, and every time you do read it you can come out with something different.

The weaknesses:

I think that the weaknesses of the novel lie in the ideas presented in it. Less liberal people may find the book offensive, even. Because of the stigma attached to same sex relationships. There may also be people who do not enjoy reading the type of book that invites the reader to come to their own conclusions about the book’s storyline, some might even see this as lazy writing, a book in which the author has not presented any ideas, has been frightened, perhaps, and therefore left it up to his readers. There are also some people who would not enjoy the surreal aspects of the novel; however I would argue that they aren’t really surreal, they are metaphors.

Sputnik sweetheart Murikami explaines creativness

pg 85
'But I couldn't love her'

Here in this passage K is describing his love for Sumire. He tells the reader thaht Sumire is the love of his life. He can't possibly love anyone else. There is an interesting contrast between his relationship with the woman, who he has just had sex with (who, coincidentially is married) who tells him that he is the only one she loves, and his thoughts on Sumire. I intended for the readers to see the desparatness of K's love, a love for of barriers and complexities, a one-sided, doomed love. Within K's narration is encapsulated a despair so deep, because with all other women there seems to be an awkwardness, undoubtedly because he can't forget Sumire, in a way, here, irony is introduced. He feels he 'need's Sumire, he needs the woman he loves, love is not a luxury, at the end of the passage, 'or I wouldn't be able to survive.

Sputnik Sweetheart, Murikami explains creativeness

pg 59-60

• 'How well do we really know ourselves?'


• Writing as Murikami:

In this passage I was trying to show the readers the limits of this kind of narration. In a sense K was exploring the limitations of our thinking, because K believes that in fact thinking of ourselves in a sense is not thinking about ouselves, but it leads us more into our thoughts on the world, the human race; and K feels that he hasn't discovered , and probably never will uncover the answers to life's 'Big' questions. K hence talks of painting an objective image of oneself, which as he explores is near impossible. It's with angst that K states the opinion that it's a paradox, you can't descrbe yourself objectively, even if you try you wont be objective, you can't go outside of yourself, because you are you.

Wide Sargasso Sea is set after the abolition of slavery, placing it roughly around 1836, this is nearly 30 years after the time period in which Jane Eyre was set. Bertha neither belongs to the white society nor the Black, this puts her in an uneasy position, and makes her childhood very unstable. The reason for the racial hatred between the two races at the time was the, the Emancipation Act, passed in 1799, calling for the freedom of all the slaves by 1827. Therefore the ,slaves were now free, but in several instances in the novel Rhys shows readers that this is still not the case, (p11) ‘no more slavery! She had to laugh!’ there is now just a huge amount of racial tension, built up because of the injustices of the slave system.

I think that Bertha’s differences to Jane mark her individualism, she is a woman in her own right, not just a Creole spin on Jane. The first section in the novel is very important in forming Bertha’s character; from it the readers can build up an opinion of Bertha, and get to know her through her thoughts and opinions on the world around her.

I found that the description and language used in the first section of the novel was useful in getting to know Bertha, the way she views her world, (p6) ‘Orchids flourished out of reach or for some reason not to be touched. One was snaky looking’The Coulibri garden is wild and out of control and she builds on it with a great imagination, she likes the wildness and the sense of not being in control, it reflects her life I suppose.

Another way in which Rhys characterises Bertha is through her interaction with the other characters, a moment that one could take as an example is where she visits her mother. Bertha’s language and actions in this moment are somewhat child-like, her language portrays excitement and hope, she cannot understand that her mother could still be the same person, when she herself is in such a safe environment, ‘She was part of Coulibri, that had gone, so she had gone, I was certain of it.’. When she gets to the house she runs to her mother, she clings to her, and then is rejected by her, ‘flung me from her.’ Jane and Bertha are similar, they are both rejected by their family.

In the second and third sections of the novel it is interesting to see how Bertha is viewed by other people, a perception which is unavailable in Jane Eyre. It would however be interesting to see the novel through Bertha’s eyes in the second and third sections, where she turns ‘mad’, as I personally think that she doesn’t go ‘mad’, she’s just very very misunderstood.

Characterisation of Bertha in Wide Sargasso Sea.

As the novel was written as a prequel of Jane Eyre the readers (who have read Jane Eyre previously), are naturally lead to compare the two female characters (Bertha and Jane). In some ways I think that the book is set up for this comparison, given the similarity of the circumstances of Jane and Bertha.
They are both Orphans,
They both have difficult childhoods,
They both fall in love with Rochester,
They both marry Rochester,
They both attend convent schools,
They both have issues with love and rejection.

However I think that Bertha’s differences mark her individualism, she is a woman in her own right, not just a Creole spin on Jane. The first section in the novel is very important in forming Bertha’s character; from it the readers can build up an opinion of Bertha, and get to know her through her thoughts and opinions on the world around her.

I found that the description and language used in the first section of the novel was useful in getting to know Bertha, the way she views her world, (p6) ‘Orchids flourished out of reach or for some reason not to be touched. One was snaky looking, another like an octopus with long thin brown tentacles bare of leaves hanging from a twisted root.’ The Coulibri garden is wild and out of control and she builds on it with a great imagination, she likes the wildness and the sense of not being in control, it reflects her life I suppose.

Another way in which Rhys characterises Bertha is through her interaction with the other characters, a moment that one could take as an example is where she visits her mother, after the fire and Pierre has died. Bertha’s language and actions in this moment are somewhat child-like, her language portrays excitement and hope, she wants things to be different, she cannot understand that they could be the same, that her mother could still be the same person, when she herself is in such a safe environment, ‘She was part of Coulibri, that had gone, so she had gone, I was certain of it.’. When she gets to the house she runs to her mother, she clings to her, and then is rejected by her, ‘and she said, ‘No,’ quietly. Then ‘No no no’ very loudly and flung me from her.’ In this way Jane and Bertha are similar, they are both rejected by their family.

In the second and third sections of the novel it is interesting to see how Bertha is viewed by other people, a perception which is unavailable in Jane Eyre. It would however be interesting to see the novel through Bertha’s eyes in the second and third sections, where she turns ‘mad’, as I personally think that she doesn’t go ‘mad’, she’s just very very misunderstood.

Comparison of the Wide Sargasso Sea BBC film and of the novel by Jean Rhys.

After reading the novel for the first time I was not particularly impressed by it. I had read Jane Eyre before it and was naturally inclined to compare them to each other, and Wide Sargasso Sea, I thought, was poorer in comparison. I then re-read section one of WSS, and, having been reading more analytically, was more disposed to liking it. I particularly liked the descriptions of ‘wild’ Coulibri. The novel is fast paced and post modern, underneath layers of confusion and wildness.

Like the novel the BBC interpretation is fast paced and very colourful. The way it is shot allows viewers to delve into the story, and follow the characters through their up and downs. However the film, I think, lends itself to the story much better than the novel, because of the ability to switch from one moment and character, to the next, without a need to spend time on explanation or ‘scene setting’. However I thought that the fact that the film did not focus any of its time on the first section was to its demise; I think that because of this we do not have a fair opinion of Bertha, she had no way of explaining her actions. I think that her experiences in the first section gravely stimulate a lot of Bertha’s behaviour, in reaction to the challenges in section 2. I would argue, from the film, that Bertha was not mad, but grimly misunderstood and not in any way treated fairly; it distorts the story. However that is not the impression that I received from the book, this is, I think a bizarre way of representing the novel.

Furthermore I think that the way in which the film epitomises Bertha’s turning ‘mad’ is very unsubtle and far too unexplained. I don’t think that the novel here was fairly adapted, it is, in my opinion, far too simplified, there is no real battle in Rochester’s mind, it appears, as to whom he should believe, this is interesting as it puts into question whether Rochester was ever truly happy with Bertha, or perhaps he was always guarded? This, then, could be a way of explaining Bertha’s reaction to the viewers, she has possibly realised this.

However the film did put more pressure on highlighting the social issues entwined within the novel, the issue of slavery certainly stuck out more in the film than in the book. The element, which film also highlighted to a greater extent, was sex. The film made sex one of its key themes and these scenes were very graphic. Certainly when I read the book this did not appear to be the case and I think that it was not very necessary to do so, however I think that the rape/affair with Amélie the servant was a very well handled element in the film, very much brought out the issues of status after the slave emancipation, and really highlighted the sense of despair which this causes to Bertha.

Overall I thought that the film was certainly an interesting interpretation of the book but that it was very one sided and the book could have been interpreted very differently, but it did make me re-evaluate my opinions of the story.