21st Century Literature discussion

What about the meta-ending (an ending about endings? Does it reflect reality? What were your expectations for the characters?

The only character that I had any smypathy with was Madeleine: she managed to stay sane and constant despite pressure from her parents, Mitchell and, above all, Leonard. Mitchell was basically decent, but rather immature while leonard was a selfish, arrogant bore. After he found that he wasn't quite as clever as he thought he was (At Pilgrim Lake) his feelings of inadequacy came to the fore and he went downhill very quickly.
This was not the sort of novel that I would have chosen myself but I nevertheless enjoyed the sharp and witty observations about relationships.

I'm not sure what I expected, but it wasn't what I got. The manner in which Leonard left Madeline surprised me. I think though, as someone else commented on another thread, it may be the only unselfish thing Leonard did in the entire book. As for the ending of the book being the ending for these characters -- I rather suspect Claire's and Mitchell's paths may cross again in another fifteen or twenty years. Who knows, Madeline might find Mitchell much more interesting and appealing after he has grown up some. Mitchell reminds Madeline of a discussion they had early on about three types of marriage. Type I marries their high school or college sweetheart immediately after graduation. Mitchell suspected Madeline would turn out to be type III, who marry much later in life. Madeline has turned out to be a type I, but that marriage is short lived, and presumably annulled. There is still potential for her first lasting marriage to be a type III.

I agree, John, I didn't much like any of the characters at all.

Madeleine did well, despite everything that was thrust at her: parental pressure, a deeply disturbed husband, 'wet blanket' Mitchell, weird sister....

I doubt I would have read this if not for it being Book of the Month (!), but I'm glad I did. I think the author is a fascinating character and now I've read all of his books I feel I know a little more about him.

I’ve rated the book at 4 stars, because I felt that whilst it was probably a 3½ star book (for me) it didn’t warrant being downgraded to 3 stars!

I don't know what I expected. But, like you, Casceil, I was surprised by the way Leonard left Madeleine. Although I wasn't surprised that he did leave I strongly suspect not only that he will back - like a bad penny - but that Madeleine will have him back. It would be in character for Leonard to bounce back when he's 'down' (and feeling sorry for himself) and if you have loved someone like Madeleine has clearly loved Leonard I doubt she'll ever get over it. Unless she's stronger/more shallow than I give her credit for.

Goodness, it never occurred to me that Mitchell and Claire could meet up again. But, why not indeed? We can only imagine what sort of person the mature Mitchell will be. But I doubt he's for Madeleine. In my experience if it ain't there from the very beginning it never will be - not unless something radical transpires.

I agree, Madeleine would have been Type III material if not for Leonard.

Eugenides's previous fiction has given us unique, tragicomic perspectives on oppressive families, gender stereotypes, and the process of trying to discover our true selves. How does The Marriage Plot enhance your reading of Eugenides's other works?

Sophia wrote: "I don't know what I expected. But, like you, Casceil, I was surprised by the way Leonard left Madeleine. Although I wasn't surprised that he did leave I strongly suspect not only that he will bac..."

I think that's an interesting comment about Madeleine being a Type III had she not met Leonard because that has me asking if Eugenides is trying to say that when it comes to love and marriage their is no "type".

If Madeleine and Mitchell's theory on Type I through III people were correct and all evidence (aside from Leonard) suggests that Madeleine were Type III then that shouldn't have changed regardless of who she was with.

With Leonard though, Eugenides tosses the whole Type Theory out the window and has Madeleine rush into each stage of her relationship with Leonard.

I'm starting to wonder (and full disclosure I haven't started on the first cup of coffee yet today so I apologize if I'm not making sense) if much of Eugenides' theme for this novel is that when it comes to love psychology has no place in the equation and we can never know just how two individuals are going to affect one another.

In response to Jason's last comment, wondering "if much of Eugenides' theme for this novel is that when it comes to love psychology has no place in the equation and we can never know just how two individuals are going to affect one another." I think I agree. Meeting a particular person at a particular time can have life-changing results, particularly if the person has as much baggage as Leonard does. Sophia is probably right that Leonard will turn up again later in Madeline's life.

Maybe the role of Leonard is to suggest that love and marriage are not necessarily the best bedfellows!

How does the novel's 1980s setting shape the plot? Do twenty-first-century college students face more or fewer challenges than Madeleine did?

Today's college students face different challenges. My college-age daughter recently posted something on facebook with a picture of a graduate in cap and gown, and the caption "Has detailed plan for the zombie apocalypse. Has no idea what he is going to do after graduation." The reaction of Jenn's fellow students was, "hey, that's just like me and everyone I know." In the eighties, college graduates expected to find jobs and have careers. They might take time off to travel like Mitchell, but most of them had long term goals and plans. The eighties were a time of financial growth. There was much cynicism, but emerging college graduates mostly expected to find a place for themselves.

As for love and marriage maybe not being the best bed-fellows, it depends on the people. Leonard is almost like a dangerous addiction for Madeline.

You’re right: Madeleine, who I feel must be suffering with low self-esteem by the end of the novel, is addicted to Leonard. Addiction and marriage are definitely not good bedfellows!

When I went to University in the 1970s very few of us thought about jobs, at all. It was a golden opportunity to study whatever took your fancy, for a couple of years. Thereafter, there were a lot of companies in the UK who are looking to employ graduates no matter what they'd recently studied. A degree was a mark of excellence.

I don't feel the characters in this novel are under a great deal of pressure, either, because they know that it will not be difficult to find a job.

I wonder if modern college graduates, who don't anticipate their chances of getting a job are good, are going to College for different reasons in the 2000s. Or is it the still the case that you stand a better chance of getting a well-paid job if you are a graduate? In the UK a lot of graduates are never going to land themselves good jobs, particularly those with Mickey Mouse degrees (!)

Hey, if Leonard, Mitchell and Madeleine were all on Facebook, are they friends with each other? What do their pages look like? What info - if any - do they share?

Mitchell and Madeline would be friends on Facebook. Leonard? I don't think he would be on Facebook. He would play online MMO games like Call of Duty or Worlds of Warcraft, and he would have friends all over the world he regularly played with, so someone would be awake somewhere at any hour of the day or night.

I don't think Madeleine has really been "in love"yet. Mitchell is really a friend-I don't think there's much physical attraction and Leonard is a romantic, angsting figure that would have been a memorable introduction to love but should never have been a marriage. I don't think she's met the man she can marry because she's still so unformed and in the beginning of the process of becoming herself.

I love the FB idea. I don't know about Leonard but I can easily see Madeleine & Mitchell on fb sharing travel photos & professional updates.

But I don't think they would talk about Leonard.

I found Leonard to be the only well-developed character, and it is obvious the Eugenides studied to make the character realistic. Madeleine and Mitchell were too empty for me, and the storytelling was not great. Something drove me to know how it ended so there was obviously sympathy for the characters.

I'm with Sophia - Felt like a 3-star book, but that was too low in light of the many passages of rich writing, so I ended with 4 stars.

My feeling is that if Leonard tried Facebook he'd soon find it wanting. A friend of mine, who is not unlike an older version of Leonard, was lucky not to be expelled from Facebook, before he left it. He just didn't get that much of the interchange is social-lite and became very abusive when people didn't appreciate his intellectual prowess! He quickly lost a lot of his 'friends'.

I doubt somehow that Madeleine and Mitchell would stay in touch. I say that, because Mitchell would have known Madeleine during a time in her life that she may well prefer to forget - and he would have seen her when she was distressed and not very together. It's not uncommon for the 'Mitchells' in this life to be unceremoniously forgotten/dropped in a situation like this.

Ellie wrote: "I don't think Madeleine has really been "in love"yet ... I don't think she's met the man she can marry because she's still so unformed and in the beginning of the process of becoming herself."

Yes, in many ways she's still a child.

I don't think Madeleine knows much about love at all. She strikes me as someone who knows more about analysing her feelings than she does about engaging with how she feels. Poor girl.

I'm only sorry that her first taste of immature infatuation had to be at the hands of Leonard. Luckily, she managed to escape a potentially damaging situation without suffering too much fallout. It could have been a lot, lot worse.

Carl wrote: "I found Leonard to be the only well-developed character, and it is obvious the Eugenides studied to make the character realistic. Madeleine and Mitchell were too empty for me, and the storytelling was not great."

I can't say I felt any sympathy for the characters. I finished the book because a) I had offered to lead the discussion!!!! and b) I rarely start a book without I finish it.

A lot of this book felt lightweight to me, save for Eugenides' portrayal of Leonard, which I think should be required reading for anyone considering setting up home with someone sentenced to suffering with Manic Depression/Bi-Polar disorder.

Eugenides should also be given credit for his dialogue, which is as good here as in his other novels. Some of the exchanges between Phyllida and the other characters strike me as very telling; and funny too!

Sophia wrote: I can't say I felt any sympathy for the characters. I finished the book because a) I had offered to lead the discussion!!!! and b) I rarely start a book without I finish it.

Thanks for leading the discussion, Sophia. You have done a great job. Your questions have been thought-provoking, and have made me think about the characters in a new light. I really appreciate your efforts.

Oh, that's very generous. Thank you!

Casceil wrote: "Sophia wrote: I can't say I felt any sympathy for the characters. I finished the book because a) I had offered to lead the discussion!!!! and b) I rarely start a book without I finish it.

Thanks ..."

Well said, Casceil! Sophia thank you for all the effort you've put into this.

And thank YOU guys for responding. That makes all the difference. I couldn't have done it without you!

But, hey May isn't over, yet. There must be some 'lurkers' out there who are yet to say anything, at all :)