James Mustich's 1000 Books to Read Before You Die discussion

Second Day

As for the previous part, please refrain from spoilering the end of the book. Thank you!

Am continuing to enjoy this enormously.

Stevens continues to strike me as an unreliable narrator--Ishiguro has a special way with that kind of narration...I've noticed it in all his books that I've read.

So far, it seems like Stevens is an emotional black hole, but there were some hints that his façade was cracking when he was serving at Lord Darlington's conference. He relates the story only as an illustration of his idea of dignity.

I am curious to see if his relationship with Miss Kenton undergoes a change because of that night, and also what their re-acquaintance will bring.

Day two continues with Stevens car breaking down. It's interesting that in each stage of his journey so far, Stevens has interacted with someone while on the road, someone out of the blue in a way. First the man who suggests he hikes to a spot to see the view, then a young woman who thanks him for not running over her chicken, and now this chauffeur who advises him again to go look at a natural spot. I'm not sure what, if anything, all these things mean, but somehow they seem significant. Ishiguro has a way of inserting details like this, though what they mean is sometimes ambiguous.

We also learn that something is up with Stevens' former employer, Lord Darlington, but he's reticent to bring it up, and actually details times where he's hidden his former status. Not sure how that's going to tie into the overall story.

On to day three!

From this second day’s acquaintance, the reader becomes more convinced that Stevens is severely emotionally repressed, placing undue importance to his professional dignity. But we also realise Stevens’ self deception is currently obscuring some morally dubious action by Lord Darlington in the 1930’s.
Stevens reflections upon Miss Kenton’s irritability towards him before an unofficial foreign policy conference regarding enforcement of the Versailles’ treaty in 1923 at Darlington Hall also contrasts with her, perhaps temporary, softening attitude towards him when his father dies.
As Bryan notes, there are accidental events, such as the meetings upon the road and also the request to instruct the young (23!) Mr Cardinal about the “facts of life”, which is twice unsuccessfully attempted by Stevens. These events are mysterious, unsettling, because as readers we don’t know whether they are meant to signify some larger truth. The unsettling nature of these events arises since as readers we are used to knowing that if an author spends time detailing an event, it is important to the story, but this is not yet clear.

Carlton wrote: "These events are mysterious, unsettling, because as readers we don’t know whether they are meant to signify some larger truth...."

I find Ishiguro's writing is littered with this sort of thing, but I've still yet to draw any firm conclusions about it--they are unsettling, especially to the reader who is looking for these kinds of clues, and wondering what they might mean for the larger story.

Bryan and Carlton both hit on something that I noticed right away. Steven's lack of emotions. Or at least his lack of displaying emotions to others (including his readers!) Then when I thought back to the all three stories he told about the top notch butlers and their dignity, It hit me what Steven's was trying to do.

In the story with the Tiger, the butler dealt with the situation like it was no big deal. The first story about his father dealing with the guys in the back of the car.... just standing there... not displaying any emotion. Then the second story about his father dealing with the military officer who was responsible for the death of his son.... and basically... not reacting.

All these instances of "great butlership" were absent any emotional stirrings. This is what Steven's things makes a great butler.

In the morning we hear the story about when his father dies. Steven's hardly reacts at all. No emotion is displayed. He redirects the doctor and even states that his father would have wanted him to act as he (Steven's) had.

I was also wondering why he denied knowing his former employer.... hmmmmm.... Mr. Steven's what are you hiding?