Now That We’ve Read The Unconsoled (sort of)

I don’t have much left of the book and plan to finish it shortly but now that we have a sense of the finale and some existing criticism, I definitely feel in a position to share some opininons on the text.  I’m going to make a connection here drawing from, sorry I don’t have the article but the guy who compares Ryder’s narration to the theory of homunculi.  To envisiage this I’m going to drop names like woah and here it is, Being John Malkovich. If you haven’t seen this film, I don’t know what you’ve been doing for your whole life and will make no disparaging remarks but this is defintely a film everyone should see (I’m guilty of this with other movies so don’t feel bad if you havent seen it). Well anyway if you havent, basically the film is about a man who finds a doorway that propels him down a tunnel into the consciousness of John Malkovich, in some vague sort of way.  Over time, the man (John Cusack) becomes a sort of humunculi and ursurps (wow never thought I’d use that word in a sentence) John Malkovich’s consciousness.  The narration of the film and the tools used to convey this shift in power over John Malkovich’s consciousness is very similar to the techniques used in The Unconsoled.  Hmm I just realized this would be some great hybrid paper but I don’t think I’m cool enough to write it.  As a reader we are experiencing a feeling similar to that of entering John Malkovich’s consciousness but with Ryder.  Ryder as a narrator shares this experience in a sense as he is both aware and unaware of his external reality, lending viability to the “presence” of a homunculus.  If so, the reader is in direct interaction with this humunculi and from the very first page could have entered into the consciousness of Ryder akin to those going into the doorway and down that tunnel in Being John Malkovich.  This comparision is probaly better understood in extralinguistical fashion so if anyone agrees thats cool if not oh well.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Published in: on May 17, 2010 at 11:16 am Comments (1)

The URI to TrackBack this entry is:

RSS feed for comments on this post.

One Comment Leave a comment.

  1. on May 19, 2010 at 2:14 am muledog Said:

    I think this is deifnitley a valid connection but our role seems more distant than Cussacks. He is watching his world through the eyes of another so he really understands alot more than us. We are trying to figure out this new world (some unkown place in Eastern Europe with people slightly different than those of our world) and how it relates to the consciousness of Ryder. The difference is embodied in the fact that in the film, Kusack is literally in the head so there is a more close, understanding direct connection. In our we do not know our position, in this same way it is more distant and we do not know the world as well as Kusack knows Malkovich’s.

Leave a Comment

Spam prevention powered by Akismet

Skip to toolbar