Julian Barnes can do British teenage drama perfectly; he has demonstrated as much in Metroland (1980) and the Man Booker Prize–winning The Sense of an Ending (2011). Barnes reanimates the yearnings, the certitudes, and the ignorance that are part and parcel of youth using a retrospective voice that is by turns hilarious and tender while never stooping to condescension or simply reinhabiting naïveté. Fans will not be surprised, then, to find that The Only Story — being a British teenage romance — is a perfectly accomplished book, with no missteps, inconsistencies, or obvious shortcomings. But is it any more than that? Is Barnes, after the bold performance that was The Noise of Time (about the life of Dmitri Shostakovich), just playing it safe?
In terms of topic, perhaps. But not in the way that topic is handled, not in the least. The Only Story stakes bold claims and provokes surprising questions that demonstrate Barnes is anything but resting on his laurels.This is Julian Barnes's latest offering, an author I absolutely adore. It is a profound and moving love story, and the complexities, intense suffering and heartbreak that accompanies it. It has Paul looking back on his only story, the love of his life, and his shifting perspectives as time passes. Barnes can be relied on for his well crafted beautiful prose and imagery, underscored by a musicality that beguiles and delights. The novel is split into three parts, and relates the story of 19 year old Paul, a Sussex University student who in 1963 meets and falls in love with 48 year old married Susan, who has children older than him and carries heavy emotional baggage from her personal history. What follows in a detailed examination of the repercussions on the people in their lives of their love affair amidst the middle class suburban attitudes, social norms and expectations of the period that the lovers are subject to.
Barnes uses the classic device of moving from first person narrative, to the second person and finally the third person to highlight the increasing distance that Paul injects into his love story, moving from the intense passion at the beginning to a more dispassionate approach. He is aware that his memories are unreliable and his thinking tainted by self delusion. What Barnes gives is his insights into the human condition, a subtle reflection and observations on the nature of love and the trajectory it follows for Paul, infused with an air of melancholia set in a specific time and place. Whilst there are echoes of Barnes previous novels, I found this a brilliant and thought provoking read that I recommend highly. Many thanks to Random House Vintage for an ARC.
Q. 1) Memory Novel - Structurally as well as thematically
Answer:-
Every man has a past of his own. A lot of new stories can come out of that by remembering the past.Its past is contained within its memory and it comes out at certain times. The same thing is shown in this 'the only story' novel.We can say that this novel 'The only Story' is a memory novel. Because it is based on the memory of Paul Roberts. He tells his own story so we can say that he himself is narrative. So the question here is whether they themselves are narrative. And we can see many points related to memory which are shown below.
1)History is collective memory; memory is personal history
2)Trauma in memory
3)Memory and morality
4)Memory prioritizes
The love affair in Pual's life is depicted in this novel. So clearly we find that his own personal point of view has shown the whole novel. But we don't know if this novel is a first person narrative.The structure of the whole novel seems to us to be connected with one memory. The storyline of the whole novel runs in the same way as the thing that comes in the memory. One thing ends, another thing begins. Once again the same thing has started and another thing is done. The structure of the whole novel is going on as the thoughts in the memory come from one thing to another and from one thing to another.
Q. 2) ‘The only Story’ as a Postmodern Novel.
The Only Story is a postmodern novel. It thinks about the situation that is happening now and may happen in future also. People who tell their story based on their memory are problematic. These points prove that it is a postmodern novel.
Postmodernists rejected the view which culminated with realism, that literature was a reliable source of universal truths, though such view was never before questioned. Thus, 'The Only Story' questions the memory narration of Paul who, earlier in the novel, considers himself as a truth-teller.
The very assumption that art imitates life is questionable; it could be that life imitates art. Thus, Paul's falling in love with a middle-aged woman is seen by him as some 'literary-moment'. Though it does not turn out to be so romantic as literature imagines it to be.
There is no realm that contains objective reality and objective truth, according to postmodernist, and in this context we speak of relativism, which is another typical postmodernist trait. Thus, our narrator Paul is in search of objective truth about human relations and tries to make sense of whatsoever is happening, but ultimately fails and starts looking at everything in terms of relativism.
Modernists also believed in the cult of the genius, which they inherited from the Romantics, according to which artists were the elite, hypersensitive persons who can grasp the ultimate truth, which was another idea of modernists that postmodernists rejected. Thus, the protagonist through which 'The Only Story' is narrated has no grasp over the objective truth and neither is he a hypersensitive soul. Through narrator, Julian Barnes rejects the idea that writers are genius who have grasped the universal truth
Modernists still pretended that their novels were not constructs but that they somehow revealed the truth, which again the postmodernist challenged. Even the notion of consciousness, personality, mind, were rejected by the postmodernists, who claimed that consciousness was rooted in language which describes nothing but itself according to them. Thus, the world view constructed by the word ‘love’ is questioned in this novel. The word ‘love’ is supposed to give us a worldview of happiness, togetherness, blissfulness, idyllic, peaceful, harmonious, joyful, ecstatic, heavenly life. In this novel, ‘love’ shatters family life, it brings pity and anger, it makes people alcoholic and liars.
Q. 3) Theme of Love (Passion + Suffering)
This whole novel is based on love because in this novel, when thinking about the past, it is thinking about the love done. So it can be said that love can be portrayed as the main theme of the novel. Most of the novel's quotes describe this theme. This novel is about nineteen years Paul Roberts and 48 years old Susan. The beginning of the novel talks about these things. Julian Barnes very passionately describes this thing. It is not only about a romantic love story. Paul is the character who becomes the victim of these things. He, a 19-year-old university student; she, a 48-year-old married woman and a mother of two; they, in London’s suburban “stockbroker belt”, sometime in the 1960s. It is not a romantic, peaceful and happy ending kind of Love. It is described the horre reality of life, Paul’s mistakes, Susan’s over-drinking, the disaster of love, Nothingness of life Paul’s sexual desire, Susan’s rigidity, and Joan’s philosophy towards life and love.
Q. 4) Critique of Crosswords
Mr. Gordon Macleaod and Joan are two people who are playing crosswords in this novel. Julian Barnes depicts the subtleties of social life in twentieth-century England in his novel "The Only Story." The crossword puzzle was such an important part of this ancient British pastime that it was found to be significantly engaged by multiple characters in this tale.Julian Barnes, a postmodernist novelist, is uninterested in the usual meaning of crossword puzzles.
Take a look at how the story's narrator, Paul Roberts, describes the hidden features of this British pastime:
“Everyone in the Village, every grown-up – or rather, every middle-aged person – seemed to do crosswords: my parents, their friends, Joan, Gordon Macleod. Everyone apart from Susan. They did either The Times or the Telegraph; though Joan had those books of hers to fall back on while waiting for the next newspaper.I regarded this traditional British activity with some snootiness.I was keen in those days to find hidden motives preferably involving hypocrisy behind the obvious ones.
Apart from Joan, it is Gordon Macleod who is found doing crosswords in the novel. On two occasions, he is found solving the crosswords with Paul Roberts.
Q.5) Paul - the unreliable narrator
The novel's unreliable narrator is Paul. Because whatever he tells the audience is based on his own memory. He claims he's never kept a diary. So, how can we trust our own memories? It's a huge problem. Paul isn't sure what he's been through in his life. He is debating the issues raised in this novel.
He brought his world in an awkward manner, never quite fitting in or feeling at ease in his own flesh. His profession as an usher at Carnegie Hall in Pittsburgh allows him to explore his passions for art, theater, and music. Paul has the irrational belief that the art world is a perfect fantasy world, and he utilises art as a narcotic to escape his mundane existence. He has no ambition to join the art world that he admires; instead, he prefers to observe others. Paul despises his instructors, classmates, neighbours, and family members, whom he perceives to be hopelessly narrow-mi.
Q. 6) Susan - madwoman in the attic
We can draw parallels between Bertha and Susan Macleod's personalities. Bertha was afflicted by his husband, and Susan is afflicted by something similar. She develops an alcoholic personality. To Paul, she tells lies. She is tethered to responsibility in some way. His own husband assaulted her. She had an adulterous affair with Paul, and she yearns for love and warmth, but she is continually the victim of hatred and sexual pleasure, and she has been beaten numerous times.
Bertha Mason, who is locked away in the attic of Thornfield Hall by her husband Mr Rochester, inspired the title of the book. She is a threatening figure, brimming with unbridled passion, fury, sensuality, and craziness, and behaving in a bestial manner.
Q. 7) Joan - one who understood existential enigma
Through Paul's narrative we come to know about the character of Joan.Susan is telling story to Paul.Joan is sister of Gerald.After death of Gerald Joan suffered a lot becau in her family Gerald was very near to Joan that also has does kind of damage to Joan.Joan can save herself from the damage.We may question that was it there nothing wrong happened with Joan as Susan is suffering from her life.Joan was living with yeppers/dog first and the she has another dog called Sibyl.Sybil is a mythical character (an old lady in a prison or jar).
Joan is the tennis player and partner with Paul.Joan has many affairs with the rich man.When Gerald was died Joan was devastated towards life.And when one devastated from life they don't go for human beings but rather find the pet animals.Joann Was doing the same in this novel.Sibyl as her ultimate company.
Q. 8) Whom do you think is responsible for the tragedy in the story? Explain with reasons.
I think Paul is responsible for the tragedy in the story. First he chose Susan as his lover 29 year older than him. They face many problems in their relationship mentally and physically. He spent time with Susan and when Susan got older he left her with her daughter Martha MacLeod. Paul easily escaped from the responsibility of Susan. Susan was not able to accept the reality and in depression she started drinking. And the situation became worse. She is hospitalised also. For this situation Paul is responsible. Paul also did not accept his mistake, he thinks that he has done everything good for Susan. He visits Susan in the hospital at last, and she dies after Paul leaves.
We have also studied the theme of responsibility. Where Paul should take responsibility for his lover Susan. If you have an understanding of your responsibility, your relationship will stay stronger. But that kind of morality towards the responsibility is not in Paul.
Thank you.
