Book discussion: Fire and Hemlock, Parts One and Two
Here is the first of two discussion posts for Fire and Hemlock, by Diana Wynne Jones. It may be the case that we've all read the whole book already (I certainly found it hard to put down), but let's keep to the original plan and discuss only Part One ("New Hero") and Part Two ("Now Here") in this post so we don't accidentally spoil anyone who hasn
( Read more... )
But at least I can start by saying that I really enjoyed the book, and that I definitely feel like I want to read it again to get a better understanding of what's going on. I've been checking out a few old legends, too, to get some more perspective on events in the book -- but I'll stop there about that for now so as not to get spoilery...
And here are two discussion points, for starters.
(1) The NOWHERE vases are clever and puzzling. I'd noticed, when I was looking up the novel's table of contents on Amazon before making our discussion schedule post, that all four parts had titles that were anagrams of the same letters -- New Hero, Now Here, Where Now? (with an extra W), Nowhere.
Actually, I found that whole scene in the garden at Hunsdon House intriguing, because everything seemed perfectly normal and mundane, except for the vision of water in the empty pool and the fact that Polly and Mr. Lynn obviously both saw it. I think that was the first sign (other than the initial chapter where older-Polly realizes there's something odd about her memories) that there's something odd going on.
And then, when Seb orders Polly not to see Mr. Lynn after being caught following her and Nina, he accuses her of "working the Nowhere vases". But it was Mr. Lynn that turned the vases; Polly only watched. When she tried to turn them on her own, the day she stole the photograph from Laurel's room, she couldn't move them.
So this makes me wonder about the significance of the vases, and of "working" them. Could even Mr. Lynn have turned them himself if Polly hadn't been there? Which connects up to the question of the "hero business" and the way their imagining and storytelling seems to make things happen. Who is doing that? Is it Polly, or is it Mr. Lynn, or is it necessary for the two of them to do it together to make things actually happen? What does Polly's ability to recognize the "heroes" in the LPO photograph have to say about this question -- but if it's her imagination that's making things happen on its own, what does it mean that she couldn't move the vases?
(2) Supporting characters. I was impressed by how often the supporting characters felt like tips of icebergs -- I though that in general, DWJ is very good at hinting that there are complicated personalities behind the smattering of details that we are given, which says a lot for her ability to create complex and multi-dimensional characters. On the other hand, since Polly is the narrator, is this storytelling technique giving a young child too much credit for analyzing people? But then, I guess it's really nineteen-year-old Polly who's actually the narrative voice, so we could be seeing the benefit of her hindsight. In any case, it makes the characters interesting to see hints of complexities.
I'll stop here for now, but like katyhasclogs I think I'll be rereading this week, so I may post again if more thoughts come burbling up!
Reply
I'm glad you mentioned that, because I'd been meaning to ask what everyone makes of the nowhere vases.
I've tended to view them as a sort of metaphor/representation/example of the idea of 'nowhere' that crops up all through the book, but I do wonder if that's all they are. Like you say, Seb talks about "working" them, which makes it sound as if turning them has some effect (he also, in that sentence, makes a point of "you didn't eat anything and you didn't drink anything" - what's that about?).
I noticed on my re-read that Mr Lynn is described as, "like Samson ... getting ready to pull down the temple" when he's about to do the turning. Is that maybe more than just a visual description? In turning the vases is Mr Lynn pulling down (or beginning to pull down) something larger? (Can't speculate what that might be in any detail without getting spoilery, and I'm not sure if this theory is a bit fanciful anyway.)
Another thought is that after turning them, Polly and Mr Lynn have their "it must be some kind of enchantment" conversation. Could the very act of them saying it's an enchantment, make it so, like with their other imaginings?
Likewise, with the exception of 'New Hero', don't all of the section headings appear in the several turnings? Could those turns be setting up/dictating the rest of the story?
All in all I still have more questions about the vases than potential answers. Like you say, why can Polly not move them when she's in the garden another time? Why does Seb say "you" when Mr Lynn turned them? And why does one move faster than the other?
the way their imagining and storytelling seems to make things happen. Who is doing that? Is it Polly, or is it Mr. Lynn, or is it necessary for the two of them to do it together to make things actually happen?
I have a quote that goes some way to answering that, but it's from the final chapter and therefore spoilery...
Reply
Exactly! On a very concrete level, the vases represent how "nowhere" can turn into "here now", etc., and vice versa, just from a change in perspective, which is already cool. But Seb's comment, and the fact that Polly couldn't turn them, all make me wonder if they have some other kind of power as well.
Mr Lynn is described as, "like Samson ... getting ready to pull down the temple" when he's about to do the turning. Is that maybe more than just a visual description? In turning the vases is Mr Lynn pulling down (or beginning to pull down) something larger?
I was just rereading that part last night and wondering more or less the same thing, heh.
Another thought is that after turning them, Polly and Mr Lynn have their "it must be some kind of enchantment" conversation. Could the very act of them saying it's an enchantment, make it so, like with their other imaginings?
That's really a interesting point -- could be, definitely.
Likewise, with the exception of 'New Hero', don't all of the section headings appear in the several turnings? Could those turns be setting up/dictating the rest of the story?
Could be! (I also like the ambiguity of "New Hero". I thought I knew who it was on the first read-through, but now on the reread I see that there's more than one way to take this, too.)
(he also, in that sentence, makes a point of "you didn't eat anything and you didn't drink anything" - what's that about?)
I'm carefully not bringing up stuff that's coming later in the story, but I think it's fair to say that when I read that bit the first time, it made me think of all the stories/legends where a mortal goes to the land of the gods or some other magical space, and must be careful not to eat or drink anything, or they'll be stuck there forever. One place I can think where this comes up is in Queen of Attolia, where Eddis is telling the Magus a story about Hespira (which is sort of a modified version of Persephone and Hades), and one of the points is that Hespira deceives the goddess by only pretending to drink something she was given; if she'd drunk it, she would have fallen under the goddess's power.
I have a quote that goes some way to answering that, but it's from the final chapter and therefore spoilery...
After I posted my comments, I was flipping through and rereading various crucial scenes, and I think I've found the same quote that you're referring to here; somehow I'd missed the significance of that on my first read of Part Four. (I may have been reading really quickly at that point because it was getting late, heh.)
Reply
Leave a comment