Date: Oct 26th
Title: A Literary Romance, Rich in A-List Names
Author: Dwight Garner
Type of reading: Book Review
You can find the actual article I read from the website below:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/29 /books/29book.html?_r=1&ref=books
Book reviews—what critical perspectives are at work here? What connections between this piece and other course material or readings (or course material/readings from your previous English classes) do you see?
Title: A Literary Romance, Rich in A-List Names
Author: Dwight Garner
Type of reading: Book Review
You can find the actual article I read from the website below:
http://www.nytimes.com/
Book reviews—what critical perspectives are at work here? What connections between this piece and other course material or readings (or course material/readings from your previous English classes) do you see?
The book review is about a book called Must You Go? — My life with Harold Pinter. The author of the book is Antonia Fraser, who used to be Harold Pinter’s wife. Two of them met when they were at their forties, and they had their own family and children. However, they fell in love at the first sight and got married at last. From a usual perspective, their relationship is an affair and it is not encouraged most of the times. Garner, the reviewer of the book, is depicting their relationship in a more romantic way.
Firstly, the organization matters. In the beginning of this article, Garner describes the romantic first encounter of Pinter and Fraser. Not until after he mentioned the first meeting, he reveals that both Pinter and Fraser were married and had family. So readers would feel sorry for the hopeless love of the two, and later the two people turned out to be married, the readers would have encouraging attitudes toward the lovers. What if it was the other way around? What if that the families and the children of Pinter and Fraser were mentioned before the first encounter of them? Then the readers would think that the affair destroyed two supposed-to-be-happy families and they would criticize Pinter and Fraser. By organizing the article in a “proper” way, the author persuaded readers much more effectively.
Secondly, Garner’s usage of terms and quotations from the book heighten the romantic mood of the description of Pinter and Fraser’s love. Garner uses the word “smitten,” and that indicates something like “meant-to-be” kind of story. On the contrast, he calls the articles that were criticizing Pinter and Fraser’s affair as “vinegary fodder.” There are also some direct quotations from the book Must You Go? such as “the working class Jewish boy from the East End and the Catholic aristocrat with her title,” “Harold and I belonged to the same class: I will call it the Bohemian class,” Pinter’s “awesome baritone” that Fraser liked and Fraser’s words like “My Diary: it’s not about great writing. It’s my friend, my record, and sometimes my consolation.” Garner’s choices of words and quotes are all quite romantic and they persuade readers that the relationship between Pinter and Fraser is a romance not an affair.
Lastly, it is the syntax. Garner uses some very short sentences like “She was 42. He was 44,” gives readers stronger impression about how these people are “destined” to be together. And from the middle of the article, the author states that the book is like a “lightly annotated social calendar” and starts to enumerate all the people Pinter met when he was alive. It was interesting, and it made a good transition from the introduction of the background of the book to the introduction of the book. However it was a little too much considering it was a review printed on a mass media, because some of the names that are listed are not as well-known as some others.