Though this novel is by Liviu Rebreanu, as was Ion, the feel is quite different. For one, there was more philosophy in The Forest of the Hanged (hereafter referred to as The Forest), as Apostol tried to piece together a significant metanarrative for his life, trying one philosophy after another until he finally “found God.” (More on this latter.)
Also, I felt this preoccupation with philosophy was to the detriment of character development; by the end of the novel, I was less familiar with the main characters and more and more surprised by their actions (some of which seemed out-of-character).
However, The Forest definitely is a page-turner, more so than Ion. Perhaps that is why I held off posting until now, as I finished the novel a couple minutes ago. From the very beginning it seemed the reader was presented with a puzzle, and in each subsequent chapter he/she received one more piece to complete the picture. Of course the protagonist’s impending death hangs over the reader’s head the entire time (no pun intended), yet one holds out hope to the very end—perhaps, just maybe, he’ll settle down and save his life.
Nationalism is a major theme in this novel, developed more fully and with far more nuances than in Ion, published a decade before. In fact, I’ve heard rumors that The Forest has its roots in the story of Rebreanu’s brother; perhaps the novelist attempts to provide readers a glimpse into a deserter’s head, to provoke sympathy for often-misunderstood soldiers who can no longer speak for themselves.
I’ve noticed a very predominant motif: light and darkness. It sounds simple enough, but I need to go back and analyze when exactly the motif comes up, and what the two represent. (The answer “good and evil” seems to easy, but perhaps the author intended the very simplicity of the motif to drive home his point.)
And his point is exactly what? Good question. Though Ion seemed to be a novel written for the sheer joy of writing and reading literature, it seems to be that The Forest has a more charged agenda. After all, it was published on the heels of the Great War and offers plenty of comments on the nature of war itself. However, the inside jacket of the novel assures me “[t]here is little of ‘the front’ in this tale, and much of love. It must not be considered as a war story; it is the narrative of a sensitive, tortured soul.” I agree that Rebreanu has more fully developed the psyche of his protagonist, reminding me of Dostoevsky’s Crime and Punishment. However, I would think that this is very much a war story: every detail reflects a different aspect of the war.
Some questions I will be tackling in the days to come:
- What is Rebreanu’s premise in this novel? Is it “art pour l’art,” or does he have a substantial message to communicate to the reader?
- The Forest offers several portraits of people struggling to piece together their lives after war has torn apart their foundations of living. They live in a fragmented society and are engulfed in hopelessness and a lack of direction, characteristics which mark American modern literature as well. How is this novel a modernist novel? How does it deviate from American modernism?
- Rebreanu once more touches upon the subject of love in The Forest, this time more fully than he had in Ion. How are his theories similar? How are they different? Why is love—and not another philosophy—Rebreanu’s choice for Apostol’s final anchor?
- Further examine the motif of light and darkness. Where do they appear? How are each described? What is Apostol’s reaction each time?
- Explore the father/son dynamic in this novel. Is Apostol merely trying to measure up to his father’s deeds? To what degree is he successful? Postulate on how Apostol’s legacy will be similar and different from his father’s.
- Rebreanu seems to present a more favorable portrayal of Christianity in this novel. Examine Doamna Bologa, Constantin Boteanu, and Apostol Bologa’s respective attitudes toward Christianity.
No comments:
Post a Comment