Jane Smiley: A Thousand Acres

It took me some time to ‘get into’ this book. My initial reactions were to the style in which I felt it was w the word ‘liquid’ kept on coming to mind. There seemed to be a linguistic smoothness about it which was unusual and rather strange. It was almost as if one were looking at a vast and smooth area of water with a little surface movement on it but then, gradually, you realised that there were incredibly strong currents and forces playing around and fighting below the surface - and only rarely did they become wholly visible. I wonder in a way of this is in part a reflection, literal or otherwise, of the scenery - endless flat acres stretching as far as they eye can see with just a few visible buildings - and in those buildings, people and their lives, emotions and conflicts going on and largely unseen by others. The society that is shown also struck me as one where the surface and appearance was very important - one does not emote strongly, one fits in and does the events, goes to the places that one should - and if there are problems at home, personal issues, or farm problems, then these are not to be dwelt upon - and a key part of this is keeping the ‘look’ of the farm correct that even if there are terrible traumas and actions going on, to the outside eye, all seems well and calm. I suppose this might be an aspect of rural stoicism which can be such a common characteristic of novels in this sort of self-contained community setting. With this sort of life, it was almost as if it was ritualistic in its movement. and, while in a massive physical landscape, very small and intimate in the experiences of the people who live there. There is almost a hypnotic quality to the lives of these people even if the events are dramatic if not lurid. their lives are very contained, physically and mentally and so dealing with extreme trauma becomes difficult for them and much is pushed down and suppressed in their psyches. The men are working on the farm, the women in the houses and gardens and overall is the constant existence/threat of the weather which has a far greater effect on all aspects of all these peoples lives than their emotional and physical conflicts.

This makes the Lear connection interesting as in Lear, the emotions are very much on the surface (not to say they are superficial, but they are THERE!) whereas here it is the opposite. The Lear reworking/parallel is intriguing - more interesting I felt, finally, in expectation rather than in actuality once I had read the book. In this Regan and Goneril are the major players and Cordelia dramatically significant but a much more minor player. Of all of them the Lear figure of the patriarch is probably the most effective and convincing reworking of the Shakespearean character. But ultimately, I am not sure how important the Shakespeare connection is - intriguing - and interesting to see how certain scenes are dealt with, but in the final analysis…

An intriguing and interesting novel - but not for the reasons why one might intially pick it up (and for which it is best known).