Captain Corelli's Mandolin discussion

I rated this 5 stars because it is one of my favourite books with so much to enjoy and re-read. It's a quirky and haunting emotional rollercoaster of a book.

However: I completely hate the ending. It seems miserable and unpleasant just for the sake of it, and despite (or because of) everything that's gone before quite implausible and unsatisfying.

I could have handled the cliffhanger ending of Corelli sailing off with his future unknown.

I could have handled a tragic ending where Pelagia or Corelli tracked the other down soon after the war to find that they had died - even if they had to die off-stage.

I could have handled a syrupy happy ending - although I don't think it would have fit with the tone of the book, I'm sure he could have pulled it off one way or another.

Hell, give them a happy ending and then kill them both with an unexploded bomb on the beach or something.

But what we get tries to be tragic AND happy, with Corelli staying away through some chivalrous notion that he didn't even bother to fact check. Honestly, he couldn't ask anyone whether the love of his life was already married or not? He jumped to this conclusion because he saw her with a small child? Preposterous. He wanted to stay away but still sent her "anonymous" records? And she didn't connect any dots and start looking for him? Contact the record label and ask who the mandolin player or the composer was, maybe? Poppycock.

Part of the joy of LDB's books is having the narrative twist so you can see the other point of view and sympathize (if not agree with) the actions of a character. But I don't get this, and I don't buy the motivations or inaction from either of them.

Anyone out there have a different take on the ending? Feel that Corelli's "noble sacrifice" was a good one? See something I'm missing?

I, too, hated the ending. It seemed uncharacteristic of Corelli to not investigate the child. Any fool knows people play or watch other people's children. From that point, the storyline felt too contrived.

I'm glad it wasn't just me! I completely agree.

I'm also glad that I'm not alone in my resentment of the ending. It was like some kind of terrible parody to this otherwise amazing novel. The author either should have let Antonio and Pelagia spend their lives together or he should have just let Antonio be killed in the war. Who needed all this nonsense?

I wouldn't have detested it so much if the separation was for some good reason, but it wasn't. Antonio Corelli whom I grew to love would have just confronted Pelagia right away. He wouldn't have spent half a century hiding and sneaking around, without ever trying to find out the truth, just led by a mere assumption. And he wouldn't have been predjudiced towards people with different sexual oriantation. (Remember his reaction to Carlo's letter). What happened to the brave, openminded captain Corelli?

In order for me to go on enjoying the book, I had to pull some wishful thinking. I believe the moment when Pelagia stars finishing her father's story of Cephalonia was a good time for the author to stop. She seemed to had finally come to some terms with his and Antonio's death, she was even feeling hopeful. And Corelli wouldn't have ended up as a moron. He would have stayed the man who dies as a hero and whose love is so strong that even death can't put an end to it. I have accepted THIS ending for myself and I don't take into consideration anything afterwards.

I agree, Vessy. I wish some editor, or agent, or mentor would have said STOP! and let the story end naturally instead of that bizarre turn at the end. Beginnings and endings can ruin the best of novels.

So true. Thank you, Chance! I'm glad you agree. :)

I also find the ending of the book very hard to stomach.
We are used to the idea in all forms of storytelling that everything happens for a reason. Although there is tragedy throughout, fate conspires to give two people out of thousands a chance to overcome it.
The captain being billeted in the doctors house enables him to meet Pelagia; the captains friend Carlo is of a rare size that enables him to save the captain, in the belief that he is allowing him to live out his life with Pelagia; his wounded body if found by Verlisarios, the only man on the island who could have carried him to safety; Pelagias' father happens to be the only doctor on the island and the only man who could have saved his life.
Everything happens for a poetic reason, until the final, and most significant, twist of the plot, which occurs for no discernable or redeeming reason whatsoever, just bad luck really… disappointing.

I felt disappointed with the ending too, it feels whimsical and capricious on De Bernieres part. Although could it not be said that Corelli jumped to the assumption, too hastily, because he was presently torn between settling with Pelegia in Greece and being a professional, travelling mandolin player - something he felt unable to reconcile? This had previously been presented in the book as inimical (both the doctor and Corelli posited this at some point). Corelli could be said to jump to the sorrowful conclusion (which is undoubtedly really stupid) as a means of escape and moral justification, in order to take up, peacefully, at ease, the opportunity to pursue his ultimate dream of becoming a professional musician. As doctor Ionnis says to Pelegia earlier on in the book: 'Love is a temporary madness', an eruption, much like a volcano, that eventually subsides, etc - the decision, the question, is whether: once the breathlessness, the state of being totally overwhelmed and absorbed by a seemingly ceaseless desire, abates and recedes, have the roots of each person's tree entwined so that they are but one? Were Pelegia and Corelli torn from each other before their roots were able to truly intertwine?

I really agree with the sentiment that (in the last ten chapters, or the last circa. 100 pages) it drags and seems quite sloppy and considerably less thoughtfully written compared with the rest of the book. I'd like to think, given the profundity and depth of the vast majority of the novel, my suggestion is perhaps what De Bernieres had been thinking. Who knows?

De Bernieres actually said in an interview about the book: "A lot of people are unhappy about the ending - I wish I'd made it clearer what his motive was in not asking her. I thought people would understand that if you've got an important life-changing question to ask you're sometimes so terrified of the answer, you almost don't want to know in case it's something horrible. That's why he doesn't approach Pelagia or any of the local people to find out what happened. He's got plenty of physical courage - it's emotional courage which he lacks."

Thanks Freddie (and all the previous commenters!)
Interesting insight - I thought Corelli's earlier reticence was more of an understandable reaction to the situation rather than any lack of emotional courage, but I can kind of see the angle. At the very least it's a more coherent and viable explanation than any I managed to come up with!

Thanks!

I read this book earlier this year and hated the ending so much that I rage rated it a 2. The rest was a 5 to me, but I supposed there's are few hatreds so strong as one sprung from initial affection. The wound is healing, so I've bumped my rating up to a 3. Maybe when I'm ready to re-read, I can go as high as a 4!

And thanks, Freddie, for letting us know about that interview. That's really interesting, and I agree that De Bernieres could have been more clear. I didn’t identify the “fear of the answer” or emotional weakness as a theme for Corelli or anyone else in the novel at all.

I hated the ending! I also felt it was so unbelievably out of character for Corelli not to investigate further. It's interesting to read the author's perspective about it (thanks Freddie!) but I'm still not satisfied.

The ending affected my overall rating on the book as well. I was all set for a 4* until the ending left me annoyed and frustrated. I read this when I was visiting Kefalonia and it had all the makings of being memorable for all the right reasons. The ending really did spoil that for me! :( Grrr!

Oh dear....I loved the ending, I thought it was tragic and sweet. But now I have read the posts of all you chaps and ladies, I will no doubt be looking at it another way, as I will surely read it again - thanks!! Lol!!! I'm just gonna' stick with LDBs' explanation! :o)

I ALSO found the ending so atrocious. It turned from one of the most poetic, profound books I've read in years to a comedic sloppy novel that felt contrived and foolish.
But since the rest of it was so good, I decided there must be a reason that LDB would create the ending that he did. I read the interview statement above, which makes sense, but I've also been thinking that perhaps he wanted to remind us of both the tragedy and comedy of love.
If Antonio had died, his and Pelagia's love would have simply been yet another beautiful/tragic/unrealistic love story that we can easily heroise, but which has no "earthly" facet to it. The way that LDB forced us to confront its foolishness and helplessness in the face of misfortune and "emotional cowardliness" brings their love back down to earth; in the end it's just a heady emotion in a corner of their hearts, because both Pelagia and Corelli moved on and lived incredibly fulfilling lives. LDB reminds us that romantic love isn't the god of this life, it's just one more human relationship subject to the vagaries of chance. And I think, if asked, both Pelagia and Corelli would say that they had satisfying and happy lives despite the very-very-stupid-twist-of-fate that kept them apart until they were old. So. All this to try and justify an ending that drags their idealistic love story down to the level of buffoonery and ordinariness. It's a good reminder.

I agree with Millions. I actually like the ending. If it has been any other endings (Antonio was killed in war / he forgot his promise and married someone else / Pelagia changed her mind and married someone else / etc.), it would just be another ran-of-the-mill romance story that will quickly be forgotten by me. Whilst the fact that Antonio did not check the facts re Pelagia's marital status is a bit disappointing and unbelievable - it is actually quite realistic - such things happen a lot in real life - how often do we come across stupid things that people do that are both disappointing and unbelievable? More often than you would care to count! Given that under the war circumstances it was probably highly unlikely for a Greek to marry an Italian without it been seen as a scandal anyway, it was probably better for them to remain separate and lead their own fulfilling lives and preserve the "good memories" as they were. Who can tell if they DID get married whether the marriage will in fact end in a divorce, after the fairy-tale honeymoon is over?

Rolo wrote: "I agree with Millions. I actually like the ending. If it has been any other endings (Antonio was killed in war / he forgot his promise and married someone else / Pelagia changed her mind and marrie..."
Bit confused Rolo - you say you liked the ending, and that you agree with Millions. Millions said "I....found the ending so atrocious....". Can you see my confusion...?? :o) :o)

I've read it again more than once in the years since I wrote this... and I tried to take in the ideas from Freddy, Millions and Rolo. I can see the angle but it still doesn't work for me! I find the ending neither tragic nor comic and - most importantly - just not as emotionally engaging as the first three quarters of the book. You've been with a quirky cast of rich characters on a rollercoaster of romance and comedy in tragic circumstances, and it just kind of... dribbles over the finish line.

I personally think it would have fit the book better if their roots *hadn't* become tangled enough to survive being wrenched apart. A coda of Pelagia as a retired doctor and matriarch of a messy, sprawling family, perhaps a little wistful and bittersweet as she listens once more to her onetime lover Antonio playing her song on the radio, or something... But hey, that's probably why I'm not a novelist!

I like Vessey's idea the best, and basically pretend the whole extended coda just doesn't exist, that seems to be good enough for me :)

At least the ending is not as bad as The Dark Tower books or the Games Of Thrones TV series! Those endings were so bad they literally destroyed any enjoyment of what had gone before!

Bob wrote: "You've been with a quirky cast of rich characters on a rollercoaster of romance and comedy in tragic circumstances, and it just kind of... dribbles over the finish line."

Just finished the book, and you described my thoughts exactly. I was absolutely charmed by the first half of the novel.

The De Bernieres quote above also doesn't help to explain things... when was the lack of "emotional courage" ever present as a theme prior to Corelli's disappearance?

It may be that I am alone with appreciation for the ending because
the ending worked for me in the context of the theme of "writing history."

I was forgiving of the few spots that were not necessary for the story line, such as Pelagia’s thinking that maybe she was seeing a ghost and Antonio coming back to take a peek at things. I think the story would have held up fine if Antonio just showed up offering some other plausible rationale for avoiding contact. Overall, I experienced most of the novel as representations of the human condition… characters became ideas about love, about fear, about points of view, about hope, about inner conflict, about hatred and brutality, about loyalty, about idealism, about friendship, etc.

I appreciated how de Bernier (through the voice of Dr. Iannis) presented the idea that history writing can only be personal (stated within the first five pages of the novel). I chose to view the opening poem (“the Soldier” by Humbert Wolf) combined with the first two chapters as de Berniers’s suggestion to the reader of what this story is about: The writing of history (objective and/or personal) and the types of people who rise to the position of leadership and shape world events as well as personal lives.

I suggest that de Berniers was writing a personal history of Cephallonia with the same underlying tensions experienced by Dr. Iannis: “ ‘This island betrays its own people in the mere act of existing,’ he wrote, and then he crumpled the sheet of paper and flung it into the corner of the room…. Why could he not write without passion? Without anger? Without the sense of betrayal and oppression?”

The novel itself is a form of writing a history of Cephallonia… as well as a personal history of the characters we meet as conjured by the author’s research and imagination.

Reuniting Antonio and Pelagia was a representation of “hope” as a theme. Trace back over the historical events represented in the novel; and through it all, Cephallonia built back, and there were those who survived it all… a modern Odyssey of sorts (Odysseus was gone from Ithaca for twenty years; Antonio for forty-three years, travelling the world). And how were those who survived changed? (There is some parallel here as to how Odysseus’s travels and experiences changed him.) It is significant that Corelli became a Greek citizen because of his shame of being an invader. It is significant that Pelagia was so ashamed that she wanted to be Italian (think Greek civil war). What does this suggest about one’s identity and loyalties? And what might be suggested by the two of them reuniting? Love, perhaps. But only if you experienced the novel as a love story. For me, this was not a love story, necessarily (although the movie certainly made it one).

Note that it is not my intention to suggest that the novel is modelled after the Odyssey. But, there are elements of both stories that are similar with respect to life’s journey and the obstacles which must be confronted in order to survive. And, consider that this is a story about the history of Cephallonia, the Homeric island of culture and history. (Some scholars suggest that Cephallonia has been the Homeric Ithaca, the home of Odysseus, rather than the smaller island bearing this name today.)

I experienced many aspects of the novel as metaphor and symbol. Consider Mandras’s story line as one example. What does his life story suggest about the effects of war on the human condition?

I read the last paragraphs of the novel as a way of thinking about the passage of time, the events of history and what life is worth living for.

The three girls passing on the moped represent the Three Fates albeit in a contemporary manifestation. In Greek mythology the Fates have been consistently portrayed as three women spinners. Each of the Three Fates had a different task, revealed by her very name: Clotho spun the thread of life, Lachesis measured its allotted length, and Atropos cut it off with her shears. Sometimes, each of the Fates was assigned to a specific period of time: Atropos – the past, Clotho –the present, and Lachesis – the future. I have chosen the latter assignment; past, present and future; particularly with the third girl “facing backwards…. She had a deeply serious expression on her face as she immersed herself in the newspaper….”

The title of the last chapter is “Restitution.” This is loaded with possible meaning. Yes, Antonio brought Pelagia a goat, as promised (and he got it at the top of Mt. Aenos, a place where people and priests prayed to the god Zeus). Perhaps he has brought back to her the life of love that was taken away. On a grander and symbolic level, their reunification expresses hope for peace and reconciliation; invaders and the oppressed (who have even at this point in their lives switched how they self-identify) can ride together, however precariously, into the future. And to reiterate a bit, the presence of the Three Fates of Greek mythology (as I see the three girls on the moped) is a brilliant way to end a story focusing on the history Cephallonia.

Thank you for this excellent post, Ernie. You gave me a much fuller perspective, and relieved some of my frustration at the ending.
I absolutely love the idea of the three girls on the motorcycle as the Three Fates. That is brilliant!

Bob wrote: "I've read it again more than once in the years since I wrote this... and I tried to take in the ideas from Freddy, Millions and Rolo. I can see the angle but it still doesn't work for me! I find th..."

I, too, have read the novel more than once. Recently finished a few weeks ago.

It may be that I am among the few with appreciation for the ending because the ending worked for me in the context of the theme of "writing history."

I was forgiving of the few spots that were not necessary for the story line, such as Pelagia’s thinking that maybe she was seeing a ghost and Antonio coming back to take a peek at things. I think the story would have held up fine if Antonio just showed up offering some other plausible rationale for avoiding contact. Overall, I experienced most of the novel as representations of the human condition… characters became ideas about love, about fear, about points of view, about hope, about inner conflict, about hatred and brutality, about loyalty, about idealism, about friendship, etc.

I appreciated how de Bernier (through the voice of Dr. Iannis) presented the idea that history writing can only be personal (stated within the first five pages of the novel). I chose to view the opening poem (“the Soldier” by Humbert Wolf) combined with the first two chapters as de Berniers’s suggestion to the reader of what this story is about: The writing of history (objective and/or personal) and the types of people who rise to the position of leadership and shape world events as well as personal lives.

I suggest that de Berniers was writing a personal history of Cephallonia with the same underlying tensions experienced by Dr. Iannis: “ ‘This island betrays its own people in the mere act of existing,’ he wrote, and then he crumpled the sheet of paper and flung it into the corner of the room…. Why could he not write without passion? Without anger? Without the sense of betrayal and oppression?”

The novel itself is a form of writing a history of Cephallonia… as well as a personal history of the characters we meet as conjured by the author’s research and imagination.

Reuniting Antonio and Pelagia was a representation of “hope” as a theme. Trace back over the historical events represented in the novel; and through it all, Cephallonia built back, and there were those who survived it all… a modern Odyssey of sorts (Odysseus was gone from Ithaca for twenty years; Antonio for forty-three years, travelling the world). And how were those who survived changed? (There is some parallel here as to how Odysseus’s travels and experiences changed him.) It is significant that Corelli became a Greek citizen because of his shame of being an invader. It is significant that Pelagia was so ashamed that she wanted to be Italian (think Greek civil war). What does this suggest about one’s identity and loyalties? And what might be suggested by the two of them reuniting? Love, perhaps. But only if you experienced the novel as a love story. For me, this was not a love story, necessarily (although the movie certainly made it one).

Note that it is not my intention to suggest that the novel is modelled after the Odyssey. But, there are elements of both stories that are similar with respect to life’s journey and the obstacles which must be confronted in order to survive. And, consider that this is a story about the history of Cephallonia, the Homeric island of culture and history. (Some scholars suggest that Cephallonia has been the Homeric Ithaca, the home of Odysseus, rather than the smaller island bearing this name today.)

I experienced many aspects of the novel as metaphor and symbol. Consider Mandras’s story line as one example. What does his life story suggest about the effects of war on the human condition?

I read the last paragraphs of the novel as a way of thinking about the passage of time, the events of history and what life is worth living for.

The three girls passing on the moped represent the Three Fates albeit in a contemporary manifestation. In Greek mythology the Fates have been consistently portrayed as three women spinners. Each of the Three Fates had a different task, revealed by her very name: Clotho spun the thread of life, Lachesis measured its allotted length, and Atropos cut it off with her shears. Sometimes, each of the Fates was assigned to a specific period of time: Atropos – the past, Clotho –the present, and Lachesis – the future. I have chosen the latter assignment; past, present and future; particularly with the third girl “facing backwards…. She had a deeply serious expression on her face as she immersed herself in the newspaper….”

The title of the last chapter is “Restitution.” This is loaded with possible meaning. Yes, Antonio brought Pelagia a goat, as promised (and he got it at the top of Mt. Aenos, a place where people and priests prayed to the god Zeus). Perhaps he has brought back to her the life of love that was taken away. On a grander and symbolic level, their reunification expresses hope for peace and reconciliation; invaders and the oppressed (who have even at this point in their lives switched how they self-identify) can ride together, however precariously, into the future. And to reiterate a bit, the presence of the Three Fates of Greek mythology (as I see the three girls on the moped) is a brilliant way to end a story focusing on the history Cephallonia.

Roger wrote: "Bob wrote: "You've been with a quirky cast of rich characters on a rollercoaster of romance and comedy in tragic circumstances, and it just kind of... dribbles over the finish line."

I, too, have reread the novel. Just finished a few weeks ago.
I replied to Kathleen with the same reply to you. I replied to you as well just in case you would find it of interest and worth considering.

It may be that I am among the few with appreciation for the ending because the ending worked for me in the context of the theme of "writing history."

I was forgiving of the few spots that were not necessary for the story line, such as Pelagia’s thinking that maybe she was seeing a ghost and Antonio coming back to take a peek at things. I think the story would have held up fine if Antonio just showed up offering some other plausible rationale for avoiding contact. Overall, I experienced most of the novel as representations of the human condition… characters became ideas about love, about fear, about points of view, about hope, about inner conflict, about hatred and brutality, about loyalty, about idealism, about friendship, etc.

I appreciated how de Bernier (through the voice of Dr. Iannis) presented the idea that history writing can only be personal (stated within the first five pages of the novel). I chose to view the opening poem (“the Soldier” by Humbert Wolf) combined with the first two chapters as de Berniers’s suggestion to the reader of what this story is about: The writing of history (objective and/or personal) and the types of people who rise to the position of leadership and shape world events as well as personal lives.

I suggest that de Berniers was writing a personal history of Cephallonia with the same underlying tensions experienced by Dr. Iannis: “ ‘This island betrays its own people in the mere act of existing,’ he wrote, and then he crumpled the sheet of paper and flung it into the corner of the room…. Why could he not write without passion? Without anger? Without the sense of betrayal and oppression?”

The novel itself is a form of writing a history of Cephallonia… as well as a personal history of the characters we meet as conjured by the author’s research and imagination.

Reuniting Antonio and Pelagia was a representation of “hope” as a theme. Trace back over the historical events represented in the novel; and through it all, Cephallonia built back, and there were those who survived it all… a modern Odyssey of sorts (Odysseus was gone from Ithaca for twenty years; Antonio for forty-three years, travelling the world). And how were those who survived changed? (There is some parallel here as to how Odysseus’s travels and experiences changed him.) It is significant that Corelli became a Greek citizen because of his shame of being an invader. It is significant that Pelagia was so ashamed that she wanted to be Italian (think Greek civil war). What does this suggest about one’s identity and loyalties? And what might be suggested by the two of them reuniting? Love, perhaps. But only if you experienced the novel as a love story. For me, this was not a love story, necessarily (although the movie certainly made it one).

Note that it is not my intention to suggest that the novel is modelled after the Odyssey. But, there are elements of both stories that are similar with respect to life’s journey and the obstacles which must be confronted in order to survive. And, consider that this is a story about the history of Cephallonia, the Homeric island of culture and history. (Some scholars suggest that Cephallonia has been the Homeric Ithaca, the home of Odysseus, rather than the smaller island bearing this name today.)

I experienced many aspects of the novel as metaphor and symbol. Consider Mandras’s story line as one example. What does his life story suggest about the effects of war on the human condition?

I read the last paragraphs of the novel as a way of thinking about the passage of time, the events of history and what life is worth living for.

The three girls passing on the moped represent the Three Fates albeit in a contemporary manifestation. In Greek mythology the Fates have been consistently portrayed as three women spinners. Each of the Three Fates had a different task, revealed by her very name: Clotho spun the thread of life, Lachesis measured its allotted length, and Atropos cut it off with her shears. Sometimes, each of the Fates was assigned to a specific period of time: Atropos – the past, Clotho –the present, and Lachesis – the future. I have chosen the latter assignment; past, present and future; particularly with the third girl “facing backwards…. She had a deeply serious expression on her face as she immersed herself in the newspaper….”

The title of the last chapter is “Restitution.” This is loaded with possible meaning. Yes, Antonio brought Pelagia a goat, as promised (and he got it at the top of Mt. Aenos, a place where people and priests prayed to the god Zeus). Perhaps he has brought back to her the life of love that was taken away. On a grander and symbolic level, their reunification expresses hope for peace and reconciliation; invaders and the oppressed (who have even at this point in their lives switched how they self-identify) can ride together, however precariously, into the future. And to reiterate a bit, the presence of the Three Fates of Greek mythology (as I see the three girls on the moped) is a brilliant way to end a story focusing on the history Cephallonia.

Here's the interpretation that I have come to after overcoming the initial shock I felt upon ending the book. This interpretation gives me some bittersweet comfort, specifically with the decision the author made to keep Corelli and Pelagia apart based on the simple misunderstanding over the origin of Antonia.

Life is chaotic. It's tragic and ridiculous and it's arbitrary. You could survive a plane crash, just to die on the beach after tripping over a rock. You could work your entire life to attain the job of your dreams, then have a heart attack the next day. And you can share a love strong enough to survive war, famine, and natural disaster and still have things not work out because of something so trivial as a misunderstanding. Your love can be true and real and unyielding--it can even be your destiny--and still you might fuck it all up before the finish line.

So appreciate the life you're living while you're living it, like the characters did during the Occupation. Don't spend your days like Pelagia, lamenting all she'd lost and letting her present life (with Drosoula and Antonia and her father and young Iannis) slip her by--decades that the narrative passed over in an instant, because Pelagia wasn't paying attention or appreciating what she had. And don't spend your life like Corelli, so afraid of one possible future (where Pelagia no longer loves him), that he'd rather throw the whole thing away than risk finding out.

I too was hurt by both Corelli and LDB for the ending. I read the ending chapters for hours last night, greedy for a "happy ending", only to be in tears with frustration. BUT! I knew there would be a reason why and understood that the characters, whilst beautifully created, are devices to tell a bigger story, not least of war. Reading through these posts has been very therapeutic with Ernies post being most helpful. What a powerful and informative book! I wanted Pelagia to be happy in the end, because their love story was a tonic during the war and it was so frightening and harrowing otherwise and we did seem to be heading towards an earlier reunification.. I perhaps filtered out the fulfilment she did have, and hope in other relationships. Anyway..thanks everyone, now begins the slow post-read dettachment. I do think though, after this and another one of his books (no spoiler).. I will consider how ready I am for the emotional challenge should another LDB come along.