Saturday, January 19, 2008

Book Review: On Chesil Beach

Innocence, ignorance, virginity, love and love lost form the core of this book 'On Chesil beach'. This is the first Ian McEwan read of mine. Thanks Shree for the fabulous birthday gift and introducing me to the world of McEwan. There is such a powerful and composed demeanour in his writing style. In a literary world where shamelessness has become like a high stakes art form, it is so refreshing to know that there are still writers like McEwan who can spend about 200 pages writing about the physical action of making love and still not make it seem dirty in the least. The clinical, yet beautiful way in which he treats the act of foreplay and that of making love is laudable. It's a story of a single night and what transpires between a newly married lovely couple on that night.

On Chesil Beach begins thus:
"They were young, educated, and both virgins on this, their wedding night, and they lived in a time when a conversation about sexual difficulties was plainly impossible. But it is never easy."

In the sexually liberated otherworld called the US of A, it might be difficult for young readers to see the point that McEwan is trying to make. But coming from a sexually repressive land like India, I could totally see the same point. That when talking about sex and learning about sex is restricted to badly made pornographic movies and make believe hearsay from peers and older friends in school, the naivette that is unknowingly absorbed into the act of first sex could be the make-or-break part of that relationship. Come to think of it, how many of us are still in talking terms with the very first person that we lost our virginity too? And haven't most of us gained the most knowledge about sex, just along the learning curve of doing more of the same thing over and over again? I still need to find out how this tale resonates to a younger American generation of modern American sensibilities. For McEwan, when he might have begun writing this novel, it might have seemed an uphill task - how can he explain this reticence to younger readers — the children and grandchildren of the generation to whom loss of virginity is taken for granted and to bother about it is merely an oddity?

Probably McEwan decided to make this arduous task easier by staging this drama as a period piece. The date is 1962, just before London began to swing and civilization as we know it today succumbed gratefully to sex and drugs and violence and internet. Thank God for small mercies! And for all those sweet evil discoveries! So the lead characters of On Chesil Beach, Edward and Florence, like all middle class and upper class kids of those days were sexually unaware, inexperienced and ignorant. They were also again like all middle class and upper class kids of those days obedient, well behaved, class-conscious and withheld. Maybe the former mentioned qualities were an offspring of the latter. How beautifully McEwan puts it as "This was still the era, when to be young was a social encumbrance, a mark of irrelevance, a faintly embarrassing condition for which marriage was the beginning of a cure." Oh how strongly this condition relates to a younger Indian generation today - to whose symptoms, the only antidote suggested by an older generation is a grand, arranged marriage. Who should know this better than an unmarried guy, of a highly marriageable age like me?

Just like our parents might have thought in their hey days, Edward from this novel "firmly believed that to make love—and for the very first time—merely by unzipping his fly was unsensual and gross. And impolite." And to top it all, besides all these feelings that he has to overcome to make love to his newly wed (whom he is most clearly in love with too), he also suffers from premature ejaculation. A condition that he is slightly aware of, and which scares him mighty whether it would create an indelible blot on his masculinity the very first night that he can rightfully claim his place in the echelons of manhood.

On the other hand, his lovely, newly married wife has her own set of problems. She loves him passionately, but only with her eyes: "her whole being was in revolt against a prospect of entanglement and flesh.... She simply did not want to be 'entered' or 'penetrated.'" She loves him and needs him, but with an "excruciating physical reticence" — which of course makes her even more desirable to him. She never had sampled the taste and the fruit of such passion, but just the thought of it made her inner body coil and revolt. She had such revulsion to the entire act of making love, that she had all these ghosts to fight off the night they got married.

What would happen on the wedding night between two such people who had little help from the outside world in solving these problems? At a time when talking about sex was taboo?

His erotic expectations and her physical dread turn the wedding night into a catastrophe. He comes prematurely all over her, "filling her navel, coating her belly, thighs and even a portion of her chin and kneecap in tepid, viscous fluid" — as always, McEwan is clinically precise — and she reacts with almost Victorian disgust: "Nothing in her nature could have held back her instant cry of revulsion."

What path does the story take from here? I am almost tempted to narrate the rest of the story out and further dissect my feelings regarding that part. But I would have to resist. If even one person can pick up the book and read it from beginning to end, experiencing the sheer surge of emotions with every line of detail as only a master conductor can orchestrate, I would consider my review on the book to be of use. A must read, a sheer delight, which will make you dream of all the times in your life when you made the wrong decisions and wrong choices in life due to words not said and actions not taken. You will close the book and recount those numerous occasions and think 'What if?'

On Chesil Beach is brief and carefully plotted, a quick, interesting read, the writing style is very composed, the tone of voice is nostalgic. As I pondered a bit more about the book, after finishing it, I couldn't but help wonder whether the same set of problems occurred between a set of partners, in today's world, who are more sexually experienced and aware?

4 comments:

Pratap said...

I enjoyed reading the review. I am going to look for this book here.
Your comparisons to experiences to growing up in a diff place and time ring so true!
Keep reviewing - I am looking forward to reading a lot more.

Joe said...

This was definitely one of my best reading experiences ever, highly recommended...

scritic said...

Questions about "On Chesil Beach" always come down to counter-factuals: would it have worked out differently if Florence and Edward were both not virgins? Would it be different if they lived in a post-sexual revolution world? And so on. Your point (if I'm not mistaken) seems to be that lack of sexual experience can break a relationship, as it does Edward and Florence's. Perhaps, had they been more experienced, they'd have taken this momentary hiccup in their stride -- and lived happily ever after. Maybe it would never even have happened!

This is a valid conjecture but wrong, I think. Why? Let's take India, where, like you say, post-sexual revolution institutions -- living together, frequent premarital sex, serial monogamy, gay rights, etc -- are rare. Your argument implies that since most Indian boys (and girls) would be virgins on their wedding night, the chances of catastrophic first sex breaking their marriage would be high. But is that the case?

Most certainly not! I would argue that in fact the opposite is the case. That far from breaking a marriage, sexual incompatibility is regarded, at best, as an excuse for sex to be avoided altogether, at worst, as a nuisance, with one (or the the other) party opting to suffer through an occasional bout of sex. But it is not a deal-breaker -- the marriage remains intact, and even happy.

On the contrary, it is us, post-sexual revolution beings, who place a premium on sexual compatibility and regard it as probably a clinching factor that makes or breaks a relationship. Yes, we may not give much importance to one bad sexual experience but the accepted wisdom is: a relationship cannot survive if a couple is sexually incompatible.

Which brings me back to Florence and Edward which is where all this started from. You wonder about whether the same set of problems can happen in today's world between two people who are more sexually aware. I think yes. In fact, they happen all the time except that we call it sexual incompatibility. (Of course, one hopes that today's couples come to know of their incompatibilities in less, uh, explosive circumstances.) But Edward and Florence are not even aware that they are incompatible, which is why, their final break up on Chesil beach is so heart-breaking. They part because of their sexual difficulties, even though they lived in times when sexual difficulties were rarely talked about -- and rarely broke marriages.

Joe said...

Your observations are valid to quite some extent. But I would like to disagree about your reference to sexual inexperience (only) causing havoc in Indian marriages - and how since it does not happen in India, my notes do not hold true for the rest of the world. Well you cannot disregard the fact that marriage as an institution is looked upon much more highly in the Indian sub-context as compared to say an American point of reference. Just because until today most marriages are still arranged and considered more like two families coming together as compared to just two people falling in love and deciding to live the rest of their lives together. It thus becomes difficult for an Indian couple to just split because of initial sexual incompatibilities. There is a whole load of other factors in play in the Indian marriage - Family prestige, general societal disapproval towards divorce, more number of people to turn towards to in case the marriage is on rocks, the pressure to have kids and continue the family legacy, so also the basic attitude of Indians to adapt to a broken marriage and continuing with a compromise for financial reasons, and so on.

So I would rather not look at sexual incompatibility as the sole deal breaker in a marriage. But you have to admit that it is much more of a deal breaker in the Western world as compared to the Indian senses.

I agree with you when you say that the attitude of placing a premium on sexual compatibility in any relationship is more in the post sexual revolution generation.

Just like you said, more than mere sexual incompatibility there were the entire explosive circumstances under which the discomforting discovery was made in the book. It were the circumstances that played the villain rather than just some habits and mental blocks that could have been worked on. Sadly Ian chose to let the situations be and did not choose a happy ending, which is what made this story even more heart-breaking and more touching.