<p>Yes, I had a similar reaction to reading the radio address from the PM of Great Britain, and did a search on Chamberlain, finding this exact quote:</p>
<p>“How horrible, fantastic, incredible it is that we should be digging trenches and trying on gas-masks here because of a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know nothing.”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I was indeed upset by this, but I think the implication is that Viktor would have done everything possible to locate her, and eventually fell into a sea of despair (with the capsizing of his boat).</p>
<p>I happened to like the descriptions the author used when Marie returned to the Glass Room. Although, I thought it was an easy “out” to create a blind Liesel to share her impressions. </p>
<p>Sorry to keep harping on this, but…when Marie returned at the end of the book, she would have known what happened to her mom – and nobody even asked!!</p>
<p>I appreciate the historical perspective, Mary. I am pretty sure that Viktor and Liesel pushed it way past 1938, though, and that makes a huge difference. I’m guessing the guards at that train station would have slapped him silly, and taken his kids, too. I’m sorry I returned my library copy, so if someone still has it, they can correct me. I’m pretty sure it was well into the 40s that they left, but I may be wrong. </p>
<p>BC, I guess any book that makes you think is valuable, eh? I’m finding it interesting having this discussion right now, because I am reading Joseph Anton, by Salman Rushdie. Of course there’s a ton in there about a writer’s prerogative, historical, religious, or otherwise. Certainly I don’t deny Mawer his right to write what he wants, and I do believe there is enough that’s of interest in this book that I was able to read the whole thing. Actually if he’d had a better ending I would have liked it a whole lots better - if Maria and Ottilie had be more than shadow puppets, and if we had been left with a really vivid image of the house that this whole book centered around. I felt at the end he didn’t really know what to talk about, and that’s a shame. </p>
<p>As for the women, I think Liesel was very stifled, confused person, and perhaps her real love WAS Hana. I can believe she would have been drawn to Kata, perhaps even more so because her husband had pushed her into their lives. But he lost me with Hana - her affair with the Nazi missed the mark, and her relationship with the dancer was too much - not that I would object in general, but it seemed to be lazy plotting by the author, like he didn’t know what to do with them otherwise.</p>
<p>^Whoops BUandBC82 I’m sure as soon as Emmybet sees your post she’ll hasten to reassure you. I know her from her very active participation in other CC forums and she’s one of the nicest people there is.</p>
<p>^ Don’t worry, I think BUandBC82 is teasing, because she’s equally nice. :)</p>
<p>I understand what EmmyBet means…I have been critical of the book, but if someone were to say, “Do you wish you hadn’t spent any time reading it?”, my answer would be, “No, I’m glad I read it!” I didn’t know anything about wartime Czechoslovakia or Villa Tugendhat or many other issues big and small contained in the novel. In addition, reading a book I don’t like makes me think about why that is, what constitutes “great” literature, and how much of what we consider valuable is subjective. To twist BUandBC82’s own words a bit: “It is possible to have as many experiences through a book as there are people experiencing the book.”</p>
<p>I’ll cut Simon Mawer a little slack here. The book ends with, “For God’s sake, I’m Ottilie.” We are not party to the rest of the conversation, but I’ll wager that a question about Kata would follow very quickly.</p>
<p>Whether or not Simon Mawer himself knows what happened to Kata is another question entirely. Perhaps he had a detailed scenario in his head that he chose not to put to paper. To give him the benefit of the doubt, maybe this was a nod to how many Jews disappeared during the war, with no record of their fate.</p>
<p>I am a nerdy reader sometimes and pay close attention to chapter titles. I didn’t catch the Hedy Lamarr connection in the chapter “Ecstasy” but realized it quickly in the chapter titled “Hedy” … in part, because I wondered exactly who the heck Hedy was. Then in Hana’s letter to Liesel she wrote:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>At that point, I knew. Wikipedia filled in the details.</p>
<p>(In the Author’s Note, Mawer wrote: “A few non-fictional characters do make brief appearances.” I guess I kept my eyes open for them.)</p>
<p>I think Liesi has a sexual relationship with Kata. I would not categorize it as loving or healthy. (Others have pointed to her coldness re Kata’s fate.) Kata has little power in her relationships with either Viktor or Liesel: no money and no where else to go and responsible for a daughter. I think Liesel uses sex as a means of power/control. Have Kata submit … Liesel establishes a measure of control over the nest-stealing cuckoo Kata (good one, Hana) and slaps back at Viktor simultaneously. Liesel also plays with sexuality as power in her dealings with the architect and maybe even Hana. If you think about it, no one seems to have a healthy relationship …</p>
<p>^I absolutely thought so, Mary13. I was trying to figure out whether or not Viktor was apart from Kata for long enough that she could have born a child without his notice. I felt that it was suggested when Mawer described Marika and mentioned something about her dark eyes. On page 140 Kata cryptically mentions that Marika got her eyes from her father, who is “dead”.</p>
<p>ETA: also interesting to us is that in Jane Eyre Rochester had the mysterious child who was or wasn’t his, and here Viktor has the girl of similar age who is or isn’t his (although he never seems to ponder on that!)</p>
<p>I thought that Viktor glimpsed Marika briefly the first time he ever went to Kata’s apartment. Later, in Czechoslovakia, he was worried that she might recognize him.</p>
<p>I also expected Marika to be Viktor’s daughter. She was a little younger than Ottilie and I believe Viktor first start seeing Kata when Ottilie was an infant. It also seemed like long periods of time passed between their visits. There was a passage where Viktor mentioned that Kata was always available for him when he contacted her, except for one time. I assumed this one time was when she was having the baby.</p>
<p>I felt most of the characters were self- centered and superficial, which probably reflects the author. Victor makes love to his new wife in the afternoon, in a very unromantic way. He feels passion for kata, but it seems fueled by her physical appearance. Hana’s relationships are the same; she loves her husband, but sex is sex. The dancer 's boyfriend is similarly cold and calculating, interested in sex and comfort, but not a romance. The dancer gets caught up in Hana’s passion, but that is fleeting, more of a conquest. That relationship could end, now that Liesel returned to the house.</p>
<p>I was frustrated that kata is just dropped from the storyline. Why not a few more sentences about what her daughter’s life was like, prior to returning to the house? Out of sight, out of mind.</p>
<p>I did like all the onyx references. I inherited a solid onyx side table. I liked it so much that I had the guest bathroom done with an onyx countertop and bowl. It is pretty sad that the warmest, most alive thing in a book is the onyx wall.</p>
<p>At one point, I went back and checked timeline because I suspected paternity. It works out. However, Kata sees other men “friends” so … But I don’t think it ever crosses Viktor’s mind. Hana? She calls Kata the Cuckoo, referring to the bird that hides its egg in another bird’s nest to be nurtured and raised.</p>
<p>The Glass Room just missed the mark for me. I could have liked it … but the author does not let me. I find the men interchangeable … intentional on the part of the author, okay, yes. Hana points out to Zdenka re Tomas:
So the author clearly does not want me to like any male character: even Liesel’s dad has a hint of the scummy. The women … the author allows them no shining moment, unless he views traipsing into bisexuality as one. (At times, it works - Hana with Zdenka, not so much.) </p>
<p>I knew nothing about that time period in Czechoslovakia so found the hints of the world outside the glass room of interest. Like BUandBC82 I think the author intentionally keeps it as background rather than focus.</p>
<p>^Since Mawer is not the most subtle of writers, I think that if he meant us to understand Marika to be Viktor’s daughter, he would have made it more obvious. Maybe you guys are reading something into the story that isn’t there?</p>
<p>The first time Viktor sees Marika, she is described as “simian”…not a very flattering adjective. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>(p. 106)</p>
<p>On the other hand, I’ll admit was wrong about Rochester. I believed that Rochester was telling Jane Eyre the truth when he stated that Ad</p>
<p>The quote I included about Marika in the post above reminded me of something, because the statement is in the present tense. </p>
<p>I noticed in the book that Mawer switched back and forth between the past and present tenses a lot. At first I thought there must be a literary reason for it – a meaningful pattern. Later I came to suspect not…so what the heck was the reason?</p>
<p>Did anyone else notice this and go to the trouble of matching the tenses with the variations in the narrative? I kind of meant to go back and do so, but I found that I didn’t like the book enough to want to be bothered.</p>
<p>Not necessarily … we know “the Sisters” raised Marie. We don’t know when or how she ended up with the Sisters. Many a mother and child became separated. I like to think that Kata somehow manages to protect her child. I doubt that Kata managed to protect herself. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree but I think Mawer definitely allows the possibility. He leaves the waters muddied: timeline - yes; other men friends - maybe no.</p>
<p>I found myself often questioning the author’s reasons, mainly in reference to the creation of the characters and the actions. For example, the Eve, Zdenka, and Tomas triangle (mentioned in the guide questions that Mary posted): What was the necessity? Did we really need another round of triangular dysfunction? Did this plot add anything? </p>
<p>I guess that’s what I meant when I said the book had become too ornate. It felt like Mawer was adding embellishment to the story when I wanted more from the original plot. Again, perhaps that was the author’s point, to add confusion on the human/personal level in contrast to the Glass Room, and to show how history repeats itself. I was too caught up in the “whys” of the characters to notice the tense changes!</p>
<p>^Ignatius, if Viktor was the only guy Kata was with (just as Mawer apparently wants us to believe that Hana was with only <em>one</em> German)…I’m afraid that just doesn’t make logical sense to me.</p>
<p>Mawer definitely represents Kata and Hana as what I guess would be called “loose women” in the old-fashioned sense. But then to make them super selective about their partners as well? I don’t know…</p>
I believed that Rochester was telling Jane Eyre the truth when he stated that Ad</p>