The Sheltering Sky - Book Discussion

14 years ago

SPOILERS AHEAD!!!

I decided to start this thread on Paul Bowles' novel before detail fades in memory. Feel free to join in.

I'm always surprised by the ending, even though I've read this at least 3 times. I think it is superbly well-written, the style is well-paced,and the descriptions of the desert and the natives of North Africa is exquisite.

I think its major theme, the gradual descent of a young woman into madness is very well depicted. I read 3 critiques which state that the character of Kit is actually based on Bowles' wife, Jane, who did live in Tangier and who did go mad, at the end of her life. Port, the husband, is Paul himself, and their relationship is evocative of certain events in their actual married life. (I'm now reading Millicent Dillon's "A Little Original Sin" which throws more light upon this enigmatic, complicated marriage. I find fascinating the exodus of American writers and artists overseas, during the post WW II years. The same event occurred after WW I, when so many expatriates fled to Paris (Hemingway, Fitzgerald, et al.) During the 1940's, the mecca seemed to be North Africa, Tangier and Fez, specifically.

Someone asked was this novel existential. At first, I thought no. Upon re-reading it, I've changed my opinion. It's theme is the clash of atavism and barbarism vs. "Civilization". Thus the theme reminded me of Golding's "Lord of the Flies." From what I've read, Bowles used this theme in many of his works. I've also read Camus and Sartre, both existentialist authors, and find echoes of those in this novel.

The 3 protagonists are deracinated, drifters, cut off, and affected with "anomie". They evoke a disenchantment with Western society and cultural values, a seeking of more primitive lifestyles. Some are fleeing the war scene, deliberately choosing the exoticism and mystery of the Middle East, hoping to evoke in themselves some passion, hoping to feel alive. Some weaker in character were sucked in and ultimately destroyed, as Bowles reveals in a subtle, gradual manner.

Jane Bowles (a talented writer in her own right) has been compared to Zelda Fitzgerald, another writer whose work was eclipsed by the career of her husband, F.Scott. And like Zelda, Jane went mad at the end....

I was impressed by the symbolism in the novel, re: the sheltering sky, which hides darkness and nothingness behind it. Over and over again, the sky is referenced, protecting the innocent from death and nothingness.

What did you think of part 3, when Kit "escapes" and takes on a totally different persona? Were you shocked?

Would like to hear your comments, other than the mere fact that you "hated this book."

Sort by:Oldest

Comments (10)

kkay_md
14 years ago
SPOILERS

I read this book for the first time (I finished it a couple of weeks ago), and found it strange, and strangely compelling. I know nothing about Bowles, so it is interesting to know that there is a biographical element to it. Yet how odd that the author's representative character is killed off part way through the novel!

To me, until Port dies, the novel seemed primarily about him, and his often-misguided desire to connect with the universe, with love, with meaning. I loved the passage about the sheltering sky; the author really evoked a feeling of barely-concealed chaos and nothingness beyond the surface of things.

I did feel that the book was existential, with the three protagonists casting about in search of meaning and experience--painful or otherwise--who are oddly removed from their own feelings. In the exotic and dangerous setting of North Africa, they seem strangely apathetic and out of touch with the things around them. I loved the descriptions of the cities, the trains, the heat and the light--and the sky. The novel seemed suffused with a sense of menace and danger.

Once Port died, and Kit "escaped"--the novel took on a completely different feel--Kit seemed to shift from being a languid, selfish, and slightly bored young woman, to one who completely loses herself and her identity. From start to finish, her entire persona seemed apathetic, without real volition, but after Port's death it seems that she drifts to the other side of that "sheltering sky," or so it seemed to me, a nightmarish and unreal series of dreadful situations.

I really enjoyed this novel. It is strange, disturbing, and haunting. I will have to read it again; I know I missed so much!
woodnymph2_gw
Original Author
14 years ago
Spoilers.

Kkay, thanks for your comments! I think the book is well worth reading again, as I have done. For more background on Paul Bowles and his expatriate life, you might want to look for "The Dream at the End of the World" by Michelle Green.

The change in the personality of Kit toward the ending really shocked me, even upon re-reading. But however bad the events, they seemed to have made her feel more alive. When she was captured by the men in the desert, I thought of the "Stockholm Syndrome", where the victim tries to identify with her captors.
Related Discussions
Brideshead Revisited - Discussion
Q
Comments (99)
REVISITING BRIDESHEAD Revisiting Brideshead was televised last night.1 I had seen this 11 part series on television back in the 1980s or early 1990s after it first came out in 1981. I had not read the novel, Brideshead Revisited, The Sacred & Profane Memories of Captain Charles Ryder by English writer Evelyn Waugh which was first published in 1945. In 2015 I had the pleasure of seeing the 2008 film version.2 I wrote about the TV series and the film after I had retired from my 50 year life-experience as a student and in paid employment, 1949-1999, and after I had seen the series a second time in Australia. The Flyte family who lived at Brideshead symbolises the English nobility, and Waugh's marvelously melancholy elegy brings that nobility to life. One reads in the book that Brideshead has "the atmosphere of a better age." Viewers, millions, enjoy the opulent and aristocratic edge, the glitter and gloss, the grandeur and the glamour of this wealthy family estate, and of a time in our history now quickly dying-out, if not long gone. In this one house, as one reviewer put it, is a fading, a dying, empire; or is it just sublime real estate. For many, in the millennial and generation Z, I can just about hear them clicking on the remote and uttering a now familiar word, a word especially familiar to people like me who retired after more than 30 years in classrooms: borrrring! There's room for more than one Brideshead in this far less glamorous day and age, though, room at least for the baby-boomers and for the silent generation among the viewing public, with the glitter and gloss of society now often tarnished beyond repair in our complex 21st century.-Ron Price with thanks to 1ABC2, 11:55-12:45, 19 & 20/9/’11, and 2ABCTV, 8/2/'15, 10:05-11:30 pm. 1981 was a bad year in the UK with 2 & ½ million out of work and a list of bad news to fill all those English heads to the top.1 There was nothing like this bit of escapism from the real world into a nostalgic, a romanticized past, homoerotic suggestiveness, Evelyn Waugh’s WW2 vision.2 I’ll let all you readers find out what it all meant to Waugh, to his critics & to modern viewers whose views are available for us to see on that new source of info: the internet, the world-wide-web.3 1 See Wikipedia for all the bad news in 1981. 2 Waugh wrote in the preface to the 1959 edition of the book that he was appalled by his book, and that he found rereading it distasteful. I was only 15 at the time, and had read none of Waugh. I lived in Ontario’s Golden Horseshoe, had just joined the Baha’i Faith, and was in love with sport and at least 3 girls. The plot of the book was set in 1943-1944, in the months when I was in utero. 3 I was particularly interested in Waugh’s defence of Catholicism, his critique of secular humanism, and his emphasis on the many forms of conversion that take place in peoples’ lives. Ron Price 20/9/'11 to 12/2/'15. ------------------------------------------------------------- BRIDESHEAD REVISITED Part 1: In the six months between December 1943 and June 1944 the novel Brideshead Revisited was written in England. In those same months I existed in utero on the other side of the Atlantic in Canada. When Evelyn Waugh, the author of this novel, wrote his preface to a revised edition of the book in 1959, and Fr. Ronald Knox published his biography of Waugh in that same year---I was 15 and had just joined the Baha’i Faith, and was in the middle of my adolescent baseball and ice-hockey careers. By my 20s my sport-playing days had ended, although I have remained a Baha’i all my life. Waugh converted to Roman Catholicism in his late 20s and remained a Catholic although, as Martin Stannard the author of a two-volume biography of Waugh noted, “he struggled against the dryness of his soul”1 In the end, this is a common experience for believers of all Faiths and non-believers of all philosophies alike, especially in our troubled-age. Stannard saw Waugh as “the greatest novelist of his generation.”2 Part 2: Waugh saw this novel, Brideshead Revisited, as his magnum opus but, on reading it later in life, he found what he called its "rhetorical and ornamental language.....distasteful."3 Readers with the interest in this film and this novel should surf-about on Wikipedia and other internet sources for all sorts of bits-and-pieces of information and analysis.-Ron Price with thanks to 1Martin Stannard, "Evelyn Arthur St John Waugh(1903–66),” Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, online edition, 2007; 2Evelyn Waugh: The Early Years 1903-1939, and Evelyn Waugh: The Later Years 1939-1966, W.W. Norton & Co., NY., 1987 & 1992, resp., V.2, p.492; and3 Wikipedia. Part 3: Without Christianity you saw civilization doomed or, as you put it in your conversion: “it islike stepping out of a Looking-Glass world, where everythingis an absurd caricature, into thereal world God made, and thenbegins the delicious process ofexploring it limitlessly.”1..Thisis perhaps the most succinct &sufficient description of processin the act of conversions that everwere written in that 20th century.Waugh's own conversion from the"absurd caricature" of what mightbe called ultra-modernity to thatreal world of Catholic orthodoxywas greeted with astonishment bythe literary world and it caused asensation in the media. Do thosewho have watched Brideshead inthese last 30 years know of this?I did not until today and, wantingto know something about how thistelevision series and film came intoexistence in those last twenty-fiveyears: 1981 to 2007, I learned thatthere was much to learn with a littleresearch and reading, and not evenreading E. Waugh's book at all.......Part 4: “Today we can see it on all sides as the active negation of all that Western culture has stood for. Civilization - and by this I do not mean talking cinemas and tinned food, nor even surgery and hygienic houses, but the whole moral and artistic organization of Europe - has not in itself the power of survival. It came into being through Christianity and, without, it has no significance or power to command allegiance. The loss of faith in Christianity and the consequential lack of confidence in moral and social standards have become embodied in the ideal of a materialistic, mechanized state. It is no longer possible to accept the benefits of civilization and at the same time deny the supernatural basis upon which it rests." Waugh concluded the above press statement on his conversion by saying that he saw Catholicism as the "most complete and vital form" of Christianity. The article from which the above is taken was written by Joseph Pearce and it appeared in Lay Witness a publication of Catholic United for the Faith, Inc., an international lay apostolate founded in 1968. Ron Price 14/7/'11 to 12/2/'15.
...See More
Let the Games Begin! Water for Elephants discussion
Q
Comments (43)
June, please don't forget to tell us who you think Marlena was calling when she asked Jacob to wish her luck. I finally located the passage, but I had lost the context so I had to back up and reread that chapter. It didn't help me, thus I'm thinking it must allude to something even further back that didn't register with me -- unless it was, as Lydia says, someone she could contact about getting a job with Ringling Bros. Vee, re redlighting, that act of throwing nonproductive or unwanted people off the train: The word itself definitely came from circus jargon. I had to look it up to make sure. (Does anyone else think Gruen could/should have provided a glossary?) I don't know if it was done in quite so dramatic a way as Gruen describes; the sites I went to said it was done mainly when the train was going slowly, before it got up to full speed -- the people hit the ground, perhaps with a hard landing, but most were able to get up unhurt (or with minor injuries), yet there was no way they could catch up with the train and get aboard again. If bodies of maimed or dead people were littering either sides of the tracks or under the trestles, surely there would have been some questions asked by the folk who found the bodies and authorities would have been alerted. I know it was the Depression and there were things that often went unreported, but if it happened with great enough frequency, there would have been some sort of outcry -- people were people during the Depression, too, and they all weren't cowed by circumstance. My father, as a teenager in the early 1930s, did some railriding. He and his buddies would hitchhike to Chicago, then hop a train to New Orleans and then hop another for the return to Chicago. (From New Orleans, he made it to Los Angeles and on to Seattle before retracing.) They could do it legally in an empty freight car for a penny a mile, but of course many didn't have the funds. The legals would hide the illegals under clothes and blankets, but the "tosser" often managed to find them and, true to his job title, he tossed them off the train, physically. According to daddy, he was tossed off a few times himself. Daddy referred to it as redlighting, so the circus phrase was in the vernacular at the time. I didn't get sappy about the animals in Gruen's story as much as I did about Camel and Walter being thrown off the train while it was on the trestle. Maybe such things happened, maybe they didn't -- I'll allow Gruen license, anyway, although I wonder why she thought it was necessary to kill them off. But that poor little dog, Queenie, without Walter... And what makes it particularly affecting to me was the earlier scene when Queenie was lost and Walter would have missed the train to look for her, if Jacob hadn't physically thrown Walter onto the moving train. I hate being manipulated by a writer with poignant animal scenes, but I have to admit Gruen pulled a good 'un on me.
...See More
Book Discussions
Q
Comments (22)
For more background, some of you may wish to look for "The Dream at the End of the World" (about Paul Bowles' expatriot life in Tangier) and "A Little Original Sin" (about Janes Bowles' life). From the New Rebublic: "It stands head and shoulders above most other novels published since WW II." (I agree.) From the Sunday Observer: "Now and then a novel appears which does not repeat the pattern of commonplace existence...but makes us realize that our life is extraordinary. "The Sheltering Sky" is such a novel."
...See More
December Discussion: The Mayor of Casterbridge
Q
Comments (35)
Was Henchard a basically good man? I think so. In fact, I think that Hardy flubbed the ending of this story rather badly. There is too much grovelling abjectness on Henchard's part--it's almost maudlin. Yes, his last will is meant to wring our heart-strings. Maybe I've read more Hardy than a person should, but I can't help thinking of similar situations in some of his other novels: Isn't Eustacia Vye's mother-in-law wandering about Egdon Heath in The Return of the Native in a similar state of despair and self-effacement? And then there is Jude's pathetic little boy, who hangs himself and leaves the pitiable note: "Done because we were too menny" (in Jude the Obscure). Those two novels have a much more effective use of somebody's humiliation and despair than The Mayor of Casterbridge does, in my opinion. Henchard need not have reduced himself to such a pitiable state. He is largely responsible for the low opinion of himself that leads him to his sad fate. Other Hardy characters in other Hardy novels are driven more by fate, I think. wrmjr considers this a novel about an alcoholic. I agree that it at least starts out to be about an alcoholic. In fact, like Pam 3, I was expecting Henchard's drinking to become a problem when he reached the end of his 21 years on the wagon--but his drinking from then on is hardly mentioned and seems to dwindle out of the picture. --As it has to do, if Hardy is to have the ending he has. Are we to assume that part of Henchard's ultimate miserable state is a result of his resumption of drinking? If so, we aren't shown any of his drinking. For instance, he might have turned up drunk at Elizabeth-Jane's wedding. Instead, he just forgets the poor goldfinch. He wouldn't have been tragic at all if we'd seen him drinking in the last part of the book. He would have just been a pathetic, besotted old goat, crying in his beer. It's as if Henchard's drinking became an inconvenience for Hardy's plot at some point and just got dropped. Nevertheless, it was his drinking that set the whole story in motion, and so in that way the novel is about an alcoholic. As for humor in this story, I agree that there are humorous touches in the speech and customs of the village folk, who seem to function as a sort of Greek chorus in the story. Did Hardy want to impress upon his readers a sense of continuity with the ancient classical world? Did he feel that this emphasis would put his story in better perspective? --These are just some random notions I had while rereading this book, which I liked much better the first time I read it than I did this time. I did still like it, but I started seeing problems with it that escaped me on a first reading.
...See More
kkay_md
14 years ago
Thank you, Woodnymph, I will look for that book by Michelle Green. I would like to know more about Paul Bowles.

Yes, the entire portion of the book about Kit on the lam seemed so shocking to me--up to that point she seemed fastidious and self-absorbed, and then when she "escapes" she seems willing to submit to any sort of treatment and situation. If was fascinating. And yes--she did seem more alive, if only in her senses. She was utterly not a thinking woman; in a strange way she made me think of a queen bee, held in that box, only there to serve to give pleasure. Really a remarkable story.
woodnymph2_gw
Original Author
14 years ago
Bringing this thread up so others can join in our discussion, hopefully....
rosefolly
14 years ago
I read this book too long ago to make meaningful comments. However, I wanted to share a tidbit I ran across in an article I read when the movie came out back in 1990. I loved the movie and read the book as a follow up. In the article, the director said that he had changed the character of the Tuareg to peaceful in his movie from the author's portrayal of these people as dangerous. He did so based on a modern understanding of their culture, and Bowles himself said it was a good change.

Hmm, I'm rambling. I'm back from a long trip (partly to visit Rouan) and my brain is still a bit jet lagged.
hazel_dove
14 years ago
I read this book and also found it strangely compelling. I had a hard time understanding Kit's behavior towards the end and had to go back and let it the book "simmer" for a while so I could look at it more objectively.
A couple parts of the book really stood out for me. The first one was the way Kit described her relationship with Port and how they both wanted to reconnect but were both hindered by their natures. How she was paralyzed by her fear and how he had shut himself in a cage to save himself from love. (I believe it was something like that) I thought that really gave a lot of insight into their behavior.
This fear that ruled Kit helped me understand a bit more how she acted in the last part of the book after Port's death. How her entire life she was ruled by omens, always dreading some inescapable, awful event. I believe that when Port died, that was the terrible event she was waiting for. When he died, it broke that nature in her or removed it, and took with it the very essence of her rationale so that in the end she was acting completely on insticts without reason and was turned into something much more wild and animal-like.

The other part I really liked was how Port described his death..."A black star appears, a point of darkness in the night sky's clarity. Point of darkness and gateway to repose. Reach out and pierce the fine fabric of the sheltering sky, take repose."
I liked that especially because of how he first described the sheltering sky as protecting them from the chaos behind, when in the end it was where he found his peace.
kkay_md
14 years ago
How interesting, rose, that the author was glad about the revisionist approach to his portrayal of the Bedouin in the novel. I thought the menacing and (to me) inexplicable behavior of the men who "kidnap" Kit suited the trajectory of the story. And certainly Kit did not object to their treatment of her. It would have been a different novel if instead of sexually exploiting her, they had endeavored to send her back to "her people." How did the movie compare? I may have to see that, too.

Hazel, I agree about letting the book "simmer"--it has a strong flavor, and its imagery was overwhelming to me at times.

Kit did seem much more like an elemental creature after Port died; she appeared to be freed of her fearfulness and embraced the unknown (and how!). It was a pity that she couldn't overcome her fear and embrace Port while she could have.

We haven't said much about Tunner. I thought it was interesting that he was so repelled by the desert that he took off, and remained outside the entire drama of Port's death and Kit's descent. He seemed oblivious to so much that was around him.
woodnymph2_gw
Original Author
14 years ago
I'm still thinking about the character of Kit. I suppose the best way to sum her up is dwelling in fear and superstition, in the looking constantly for "omens." I suppose she might be compared to someone today who frequently reads their daily horoscope, reads the Runes or the Tarot Cards, and looks for symbolism or synchronicity at every turning....

It seems strange that in Port's death, Kit found life. In her descent into madness, she seemed to come alive and to find a new "self," hitherto unexplored, unexamined.
lemonhead101
14 years ago
Just finished the book a couple of days ago, and have been letting it "simmer" (as Hazel so accurately describes it). I found it to be a tough story to get into initially, but once I got sucked in, I really enjoyed it. It reminded me in many ways of Hemingway and how he writes for some reason.

I agree that Port and Kit were both revolving in their own worlds for their own reasons - it's such a shame that Port missed her change to a woman based on feelings/senses rather than rational thought. I think he would have liked that side of her more than the side she presented up until he died.

The descriptions of the desert, the color and vast size of the sky, the peoples who live there - all wonderfully done. I could feel the dust, the dryness, the sandy grains.... You could tell that Bowles had lived there and experienced some of this - they were wonderful descriptions of a hostile place in some ways.

Interesting that his wife has been compared to Zelda Fitzgerald, as I also found the book to be similar to "The Great Gatsby" - disaffected aimless rich/well off young adults adrift in a world they know little about and just floating from one place/situation to another without planning anything much.

I would not have read this in a million years if we hadn't mentioned it on RP, so thanks for doing it. I enjoyed it, although I am not sure I would read another one of his.

Do you think that Kit, in the third part of the book when she changes so much -- is she reveling in the freedom she feels or is she retreating from having lost her bearings/lover etc? I mean, is her changing from being a very rational person to a person who uses her senses a positive change or a negative one? She seems as though she is sleepwalking in some situations - the sexual violence from the camel traders etc...
woodnymph2_gw
Original Author
14 years ago
lemonhead, good commentary. I agree that Kit seems to be sleepwalking during the sexual scenes at the end with the camel traders. But I don't know how one could say she changes from being a rational person to an emotional one. (I don't consider dependence on "omens" to be a rational way of conducting one's life). I suppose one could make an argument on the other side, that Kit was sleep-walking during her marriage to Port, and then was jolted awake (into a nightmare) with the violence she experienced from the camel traders, which represented a clash of cultures.

I saw the novel as a fascinating study of descent into madness, among other themes.

The Sheltering Sky - Book Discussion

Comments (10)

kkay_md

woodnymph2_gw
Original Author

Related Discussions

kkay_md

woodnymph2_gw
Original Author

rosefolly

hazel_dove

kkay_md

woodnymph2_gw
Original Author

lemonhead101

woodnymph2_gw
Original Author

COMPANY

BUSINESS SERVICES

GET HELP

CONNECT WITH US

The Sheltering Sky - Book Discussion

Comments (10)

kkay_md

woodnymph2_gwOriginal Author

Related Discussions

kkay_md

woodnymph2_gwOriginal Author

rosefolly

hazel_dove

kkay_md

woodnymph2_gwOriginal Author

lemonhead101

woodnymph2_gwOriginal Author

COMPANY

BUSINESS SERVICES

GET HELP

CONNECT WITH US

woodnymph2_gw
Original Author

woodnymph2_gw
Original Author

woodnymph2_gw
Original Author

woodnymph2_gw
Original Author