The story of Margaret Atwood's Alias Grace is built up on letters, newspaper accounts of the trial, third person view - the narrative of the fictional Dr. Simon Jordan, and mostly on Grace's own memories stretching as far as her impoverished childhood in Ireland and the traumatic journey to Canada. But what is memory? Who does it belong to? Is it inseparably bound with the storyteller or with the actors told about? Or perhaps it is entirely constructed by the listener? Whatever the case, can we trust it? Is it real - the truth? In my essay I will try to find out the plausibility of truth - if there is one and whether it can be proven when based on written historical accounts and memories. I will try to see which is real and which is made up. Or at least prove that this aim is not possible to achieve. I will revise Alias Grace and its literary criticism.
As a starting point I would like to see what the author herself says about her work. 'In search of Alias Grace' is an essay, originally presented as a lecture at the University of Ottawa in November 1996, and is the the essay which initially inspired me to carry further research on the topic of truth and plausibility of memories as presented in this brilliant work. Atwood explores in her lecture how memories and time interact with individual as well as collective baggage of experience, and what possible - however twisted - outcome they may produce. She says each of us is a biography - although perhaps not (yet) written down - and hence a history on its own, but also a part of the collective history of certain times and places. We are reminded however, that there is a thin line between what's real, actually happening and our perception of it: "It's at such points [remembering events vs events] that memory, history, and story all intersect; it would take only one step more to bring all of them into the realm of fiction". So where is that "one step"? Can we as readers even notice it - provided each one of us sees stories through their own memories? Atwood partially implies, that we can't even fully trust/believe ourselves in this matter: "The person recounting here and now what he saw and what happened to him then is not the same person who saw those things and to whom those things happened". For if "forgetting can be just as convenient as remembering" both the storyteller and the listener's perception is faulty ("In Search" 1505-07).
Atwood describes how she became interested in Grace Marks' story and the creation process of the novel. Susanna Moodie's memoirs 'Life in the Clearings', which contain descriptions of Moodie meeting Grace, as well the story of the murder, became Atwood's first incentive to investigate the story. She admits that aside from numerous letters with different - often contradictory accounts - a lot of evidence was missing. Therefore she allowed herself to fill in the gaps with her imagination. It is perhaps interesting, how Atwood recollects her own attitude towards Moodie's account from the time she first read it: "being young, and still believing that 'non-fiction' meant 'true' I didn't question it" (1513). This applied to Alias Grace sheds a totally new light on it. The title reads "A Novel" - shall we assume this means "not true"? Evidence certainly is there, which means it IS real, or true. But to what extent the evidence depicts the true? In appendix 1 I have attached a copy of a letter that Margaret Atwood discovered during her research. The letter, written by a friend of Thomas Kinnear to his relatives in Scotland is biased towards the culpability of McDermott, whereas "The woman Grace Marks declares she knew nothing of the murder of the housekeeper, but she saw and heard the murder of Mr. Kinnear, & that McDermott shot him in hopes of getting some money" (Atwood "Letter"). The letter is interesting to read when we think of her equal to McDermott's punishment, which Grace initially received for - as the letter claims - being only a witness.
Bearing in mind all the mysteries and discrepancies in evidence as well as the narrative - for Atwood herself admits that Grace has "strong motives to narrate but also strong motives to withhold; the only power left to her" - I will attempt analysis of some of the criticism that the novel received while considering its multilevel patchwork design ("In Search" 1515). Before I move on to that however, I would like to present another view on collecting evidence and writing history - this time a historian's, rather than Novelist's point of view. Jonathan Spence who is a Sterling Professor of History at Yale University, says that recovering information from the past is not the only job of a historian. The major part of the quest is trying to figure out whether such information - of which there is plenty - can be considered "a fact or a reliable piece of evidence". In his review of Atwood's work - 'Margaret Atwood and the Edges of History' - he draws a parallel between the work of a writer historian and a writer novelist: "the novelist can have a snowfall or earthquake virtually whenever he or she chooses (...) whereas the historian seeks clear proof that snow did fall on such and such a day or that the earth did quake and open" ( Spence 1522). But what if we can not find the strong evidence, what if we are not able to connect the traces? Are we - as knowledge and truth seekers - supposed to abandon the quest or fill in the gaps with highest possible proximity? In either case we ourselves are shaping the history. The underlying thread of making up and sewing up runs through the novel, showing how the truth is created.
The image of Grace stitching quilt patterns recurs throughout the novel. This mirrors the multi-style design of the narrative, which in turn reminds us that a story is made up of many different little parts which do not necessarily always fit. And if they do not fit, it is up to the person sawing it up to make sure they fit. It also brings the image of kaleidoscope - where the little pieces form a different pattern each time they come together. Atwood uses this metaphor to remind her readers that history might have looked different if it was told (stitched) by another person. And again there arises the question of the border between truth and non-truth, that one step which makes reality fiction. I deliberately did not want to use word 'false' in the above sentence for it is not the question of true or false I'm trying to address, but more the level of truthfulness in truth. As Alicione Cunha da Silveira in his essay 'One story and a thousand one threads' concisely puts it: "Atwood creates a plural text that questions conventions and challenges stereotypical presuppositions, such as those of discursive categories of genre and gender, while subverting traditional modes of perception" (299). As I already mentioned above, due to Grace's situation and history, her version of the events may not be the ultimate truth, but serve rather as a check board - a kind of guide diagram, to which remaining bits and pieces are to be compared and matched.
Silveira also touches on the problem of gender, or more precisely the faultiness of the female gender and its result in delivering the right message. It is generally known that the status of women - and whatever they had to say - was much lower than that of men in the 19th century. Even worse if one was a housekeeper or an underclass servant. Despite her position and all the favours that Nancy Montgomery received from the master, her death was not even consider worthy enough to start a trial - even if it had been just to find out the murderer. Now, when we consider the status of Grace Marks, it becomes apparent that neither the court nor the newspapers would take into consideration whatever she had to say. This, together with the fact that storytelling was her only power, Grace's account is vulnerable to manipulation. And I would assume every sane person in such a situation would be willing to use this power, in order to better their lot if they could.
Atwood, on top of this, makes us question Grace's sanity from the onset - we see her falling into a fit on the approach of a doctor in a lunatic asylum. Whether her fear is real or totally made up remains a mystery. And here again we are left in the dark whether Grace is a cunning and intelligent character thrown into this institution by an unfortunate sequel of events, or if she is a cunning and intelligent character who actually committed the deed but managed to twist the entire situation to her advantage and not get executed, or whether she really is mentally insane. The novel never seems to give an answer to these questions, again leaving the reader pondering upon relations between truth and circumstance.
In addition to that, Silveira says that "the inter-textual juxtaposition of several historical documents and classical literary works with a post-modern narrative disrupts traditional modes of expression" (302). This makes the novel a one intricate web of links and paths to follow, and not only on the semantic level, but more realistically on the surface level too. Different structures and styles of texts, and even some pictures, are put together to make up one totally unique piece. And in between the lines (or the pieces) it is suggested that this one unique entity - the physical appearance of the book as well as the content of the story - might have been completely different provided different circumstances, or different time, or place, or a different weaver.
'Can We Believe What the Newspapers Tell Us?' is a very interesting research by Judith Knelman, in which she investigates how biased the newspapers of mid 19th century were. Because their readers were the upper classes, the articles were written from their point of view, demonising the savage underclass. Knelman (678-9) cites article excerpts from a few magazines contemporary with Grace's case, which style is far from objective:
- "Our publication of this day is stained by an account of one of the most atrocious, diabolical acts that ever disgraced this or any other country" (Star, 2 August 1843)
- "[Grace] appears totally uneducated, and her countenance utterly devoid of expression. She looked around her with a degree of stupid apathy, and seemed completely unconscious of the awful situation in which she stood" (Star, 5 August 1843)
- "[Examiner] seldom had to record a more atrocious and cold blooded case of murder than has recently been perpetrated in this city" (Examiner, 2 August 1843)
Such portrayal must have had an enormous impact on the sentence - the lawyers and the judge were, after all, the upper class, with the same concerns and views about the servants. Knelman says that this prejudice has its roots in the fear of what the entire working class might now do - there might be a revolt or some servants may take example of McDermott and Grace, for no one really knew their motives, nor anyone cared to find out - debasing the serving class to sheer animal instincts.
Not only did the newspapers serve wrong to the working class but also at that time the entire "English justice system operated in the context of a mythology that decreed some kinds of murder to be worse than others" (Knelman 678). And just as wives were accountable to their husbands, the servants had to be faithful to their masters. Hence the slightest wrongdoing against someone of a higher social position deemed the culprit more guilty. And very often - in a case of big social gap between the victim and the assailant - the latter had no chance to defend themselves. Unfortunately, this system did not work the other way round. Therefore the constant abuse of the weaker, or socially disadvantaged, was generally accepted in the society. Also the bias of the press was not something unthinkable as it would be now, for "the press labels offenders according to the belief system that obtains" (678). Nowadays the abundance of media directed at different target groups might have been able to boycott the upper class and help Grace out. Those days however were clearly the days of the upper classes, and so the word "justice" carried a totally different meaning in the view of the arguments above - the upper class advantages and the press merely recording the trends in society. It constituted a vicious circle where the voice of - and the truth of - the disadvantaged had no place to be. Can we then believe the newspapers - the historical artefacts on the basis of which the history is written down? Well, I guess it depends on our frame of reference - we surely can built our own history on it, if it suits us.
The novel being enigmatic as it is, takes a lot of its mysticism from the hypnotism. The tension and mystery present in the moment when Dr. Jerome DuPont conducts the neuro-hypnosis constitutes the climax of the story. Grace does not speak in her own voice but in the voice of "an alter ego formed after a traumatic experience involving the death of her only friend" (682). Knelman points out that a medical explanation of such an event was not known to the contemporaries of Grace's doctors. And the fact that the hypnotist turns out to be an old acquaintance Jeremiah makes the riddle even more intriguing. I see several new possible versions of the story here. Firstly, when Grace recognised Jeremiah, she might have played the whole scene and no hypnosis really took place. For why would DuPont succeed, whereas others could not, especially after a secret communication with Grace? The moment posed a perfect opportunity to acquit herself and lead everyone into even deeper confusion, perhaps even scaring the wiser ones with an element of sorcery - since the occurrence of split personality was not well known in those days. Secondly, it might have been Jeremiah who devised the entire plan and maybe even committed the murder himself. If he was a successful hypnotist, he might have entered Grace's memory right after the crime he possibly committed and entirely erase it. Jeremiah was visiting Kinnear's household to sell goods but he might have been secretly seeing Nancy. He even might have fathered her baby and hence the motives for a murder. To me this version seems much more plausible than whatever motives Grace might have had. We read that she actually enjoyed her living in the house: "And there we were, in a kind of harmony; and the evening was so beautiful, that it made a pain in my heart, as when you cannot tell whether you are happy or sad; an dI thought that if I could have a wish, it would be that nothing would ever change, and we could stay that way forever" (230).
There are more unanswered questions which somewhat point to this interpretation: what is the function of the Jeremiah character? Why does he disappear for years just to suddenly reappear as a doctor - Grace's doctor? Why introduce the motif of hypnosis at all? And why through this mysterious character? Ryan Miller in 'The Gospel according to Grace' gives us some answer to the first question:"it soon becomes clear that what Jeremiah really sells in the novel is knowledge"(176). What he means by knowledge should be understood in a spiritual terms, rather than in practical - but I will expand on it further in the following paragraph. For the time being I will only add that - in my opinion -"selling knowledge" is not the only function for which this character was invented. As for the second query the answer poses itself if we assume Jeremiah's guilt in the murder - despite his excellent hypnotic skills it would have been wise to disappear for a while, just in case. Why does he come back then, and why under a different name? Well, again it is safer to assume a pseudonym, or an entirely new personality, when one has something on their conscience. In fact, the wisest option would have been to never show up but then again - since Jeremiah is the spiritual "knowledge" - it would make sense that he wanted to compensate for his sins and at least try to help poor Grace out of her miserable situation. Lastly, if he would not be reintroduced, we wouldn't have yet another riddle to solve. And why hypnosis at all? Perhaps to account for the missing gaps or perhaps to shed a new light on Grace's culpability in the view of biased evidence on one hand and the possibility of erasing memories through hypnosis on the other. Whichever the case, we can neither trust the evidence, nor the main character and her memories - provided of course that she is sincerely honest. Knelman says though that "once Atwood imposes casual shape on the past, discrepancies can have meaningful coexistence"(684). In other words, what can not be read out of straightforward narrative, can be found in the riddles. The gaps between words and their meaning are further explored by Cristie March, who applies Bakhtin theory of heteroglossia to Alias Grace. But before I turn to exploring the truth and meaning contained in words and in the gaps between the words and characters, I promised to have a look at Ryan Miller's notion of Jeremiah as a spiritual knowledge seller.
Here I came across a view which - as the author claims - is original and totally new in the Alias Grace criticism. Yet another element incorporated into the semantic patchwork of the narrative - Gnosticism, or in Grace's words: "Who decided?" (222). And although the novel may not overtly suggest such reading of it, Miller concludes it on three basis:
- the novel's repeated use of water an dreams to imply (...) unconsciousness and (...) chaos or hell
- explicit ties between spirit and gnosis: Grace is aware of being torn open
- the novel hints at Gnostic cosmology, describing the night sky not as heaven or hell but as 'the outer darkness, with the wailing and the gnashing of teeth, where God was not'. (Miller 175)
And in order to understand the "significance of Grace's final Tree of Paradise design" in the light of Gnosticism and as a narrative device - argues the author - "an understanding of Gnosticism is essential"(175). For the reader's reference, in appendix 2 I cite a compact definition by Margaret Anne Doody, quoted by Miller in his essay, which presumably suits best his outlook on the case.
When Grace arrives in the Kinnear's house, she asks about a painting and learns about the biblical story of Susannah - a woman who was fancied by elder men and then accused by them for committing adultery. Grace however is surprised to hear that this is a biblical story for - as she claims - she knows the Bible thoroughly and never heard this story before. When Thomas Kinnear explains to her that some stories were decided not to go into Bible, Grace innocently questions "Who decided?" and later draws a conclusion that "like everything men write down (...) they got the main story right but some of the details wrong" (459). The significance of this episode has a double meaning. Firstly, since it happens right after Grace's arrival in the Kinnear's house, it parallels her story and foreshadows future events - i.e. being accused by those who desired her, or more precisely by the class of the stronger, older, more advantaged and supposedly wiser. Secondly, Grace's reaction - "Who decided?" - shows us her folks wisdom and points towards her ability to question the unreasonable. Her objectivity thus, inclines that the entire narrative is more plausible when looked at from Grace's point of view.
When it comes to Jeremiah, aside from my views stated above, his being the source of spiritual "knowledge" - as Miller argues - confirms his important role in the novel (however contradictory to my assumptions of his possibly taking part in the murders) and further points to the Gnostic attitude that Atwood implies in her work. When Jeremiah - who is American - tells Grace that he "was lately down in the States where [he] can buy notions cheap and sell them up here for more", the meaning of 'notions' can be understood both in terms of goods as well as of ideas. Considering his nationality, we may presume that he indeed tries to introduce the "Gnostic perspective" and "questioning the authority of Scripture (...) present in then-contemporary America" (Miller 177). On top of that, Miller, to prove his point, says that Jeremiah's statement:"A faithless preacher with a good manner and voice will always convert more than a limp-handed long-faced fool, no matter how Godly" (Alias 267) displays contempt for "orthodox religion and mirrors Grace's own response"(Miller 177). Furthermore, I see a connection between Jeremiah's words and the way a history is shaped - through skills of lawyers, press and storytellers - including Grace and Atwood herself.
There is one last point I would like to address in this paper, namely the workings of Bakhtin's theory of heteroglossia as presented by Cristie March in her essay "Crimson Silks and New Potatoes'. A quick look in dictionary.com and we learn that heteroglossia is "the existence of two or more voices within a text, esp. conflicting discourses within a linguistic activity as between the narrative voice and the characters in a novel". March applies this theory to characters and objects: what is their meaning as opposed to their actual shape and how the characters communicate and misunderstand through those gaps in meaning. The two most apparent instances where we see this theory at work are Nancy's clothing and the objects sitting between Dr.Jordan and Grace during their interviews.
Grace notices that Nancy wears clothes suited for a lady, which already creates a class tension between them, although both are, in fact, servants. Soon Grace finds out about the affair and looses respect for Nancy. And so the ladyness labelled to Nancy by her clothes acquires an ironic meaning. When Nancy dies, Grace takes her clothes and wears her dress. This, on one hand, projects Nancy onto Grace - both were maids and both desired by their master, and on the other hand dooms Grace during her trial, making her look like a cold blooded murderess who did not even hesitate to steal a dad woman's clothing. We learn however, the truth is different - Grace took the clothes because Nancy would not need them any more and so they go to waste. Grace too attaches a great meaning to the clothing for she left the dress Nancy was sewing recently because she felt it was too close and important to her. In this manner, as March concludes: "Nancy's clothing becomes a morally and socially coded object which leads to a further coding of language concerning Grace" (70). When it comes to the objects that Dr. Jordan places in front of Grace to induce association and thus elicit a confession, he achieves no more than learning about cooking methods. Grace on the other hand can't understand his insistence on always bringing those fruit and vegetables. Dr Jordan "imposes specific limits" on what Grace has to say and on her interpretation of the objects and stories he occasionally tells her, thus "forcing it into significations of mental condition without regard for the speaker's conceptualization of meaning" (74). The meaning they both associate with these objects is totally different and therefore communication can not take place. Instead misunderstanding is creating the story and in that way - writing the history.
I have so far presented different approaches and interpretations in deciphering Alias Grace. In conclusion, I hope I managed to reveal that establishing what is true, or how much truthfulness there is in each piece of this patchwork, is not entirely possible. Not entirely, however to some degree - yes. But only when we assume a fixed point of reference and that in turn, is always a subjective personal biography of each one of us, and can only form fixed links with the environment, or other's stories, on a superficial level. There is one more detail regarding my essay I would like to comment on at the end - after proof reading I realised that its structure is pretty much a patchwork itself. This was a totally unintentional effect, but taking into account the shape of the researched work and the subject(s) of the research I decided to leave it as it is, with a great hope that the reader will find their own links and connections and will make up their own opinion about the subject.
Appendices:
Appendix 1:
From G. Duggan Esq.
To J. Skelton
Toronto (City) August 11, 1843
Dear Sir
From a long and happy acquaintance with Mr. Thomas Kinnear, and being his professional friend in this Colony I feel obliged to (enter) upon to me a most painful task and one would that no cause existed for--but my duty to you and his other relatives renders it unavoidable to me & I trust that He on whom all may lean for support in the hour of deep distress & afflictions may sustain his aged and affectionate Mother and his other relatives under the (trying tidings?) of which this is the harbinger. I need hardly tell you poor Thomas Kinnear is now no more. He died on the 29th July & by the hand of ruffian murderers. An ungrateful & wretched villain of a Servant man named James McDermott perpetrated the foul deed on the evening of the day above. The details are too horrible, too painful to the feelings of humanity to (enter) upon, & too dreadful for his surviving relatives to listen to, alas it must be disclosed sooner or later.
The brief outline is that he (TK) had been at this place for two days (on business?) and it was expected on his return he (would) bring (home) money with him. He had three servants the man McDermott & woman calling herself Grace Marks (both of whom were only three weeks in his employment) and an old faithful housekeeper named Nancy Montgomery all of whom he left at his farm. On his return home he (missed?) his housekeeper Nancy and enquired where she had gone to. The other two pretended she was gone to a neighbour at a distance to visit a person very ill. He seems then to have thought little about it & spoke about getting his tea & was in the (meantime? ) reclining on a sofa with a book --it seems McDermott called him from the Hall and poor fellow he came to the Hall with the book in hand and the ruffian instantly discharged a gun at him shot him dead upon the spot. He seems to have spoken only in a dying groan of oh, oh & have (pressed?) the book to his bleeding bosom & expired.
The wretch shortly after took the book and placed in a small (apartment?) in the cellar and he & the servant Grace Marks ( ) ( ) the night stole as many clothes and light articles ( ) ( ) as they could conveniently take in a one horse carriage & took poor Kinnear's horse & carriage & the above property and absconded to (the?) United States on Sunday following (being?) the next day the house was found vacant and suspicion was awakened & search made & the body found in the cellar. No tidings were to be had of any of the servants but doubts were entertained (as) to the fate of Nancy. (Strict?) search was made but in vain. On Monday further search was made & by accident a tub in the cellar was overturned and beneath it & as it were ( ) it was found the body of the murdered Nancy Montgomery.
She had been strangled a bandage was tightly & strongly tied on her neck & in that manner the unfortunate woman was murdered but the guilty parties were promptly followed & apprehended & are now in jail here and will shortly be tried for their diabolical deeds. The woman Grace Marks declares she knew nothing of the murder of the housekeeper, but she saw and heard the murder of Mr. Kinnear, & that McDermott shot him in hopes of getting some money. I send a newspaper herewith in which some of the particulars are therein. I have given directions that an inventory be taken of all the property and effects and examined myself minutely for a will among his papers. The only document of the kind found is a draft of a deed a copy of which I herewith enclose. It will be desirable that some person should administer to his Estate or that some of his relatives should come out and look after in the meantime. I shall keep watch on it and endeavour to keep every article forthcoming The Coroner is at present in charge and he is acting under my advice. I shall be happy to be useful in any way in my power to the relatives of one to whom I was so much attached & whom I so much respected as my worthy but departed friend Thomas Kinnear. I (intended) to have been brief & await your reply but I have perhaps indulged in expressions natural if not necessary. Deeply sympathising with his afflicted relatives and endeared friends, I remain
P.S. I saw among the papers of your deceased relative a letter which he received from his mother & as recent a date as July 1st.
(Atwood "Letter")
Appendix 2:
"In general, Gnosticism depends on a binary view of the world. The individual soul, having come from the Light, is surrounded by a world of darkness and error and struggles to regain the world of light once more. Typically, the Demiurge who created this present material world is a tyrant and a deceiver. The illuminated person must not fall into the trap of believing the kind of orthodoxies held by the foolish. An alien in the world of matter, the Gnostic personality is aware of the resources of its own dynamic and Light-oriented soul. [Consequently] it is easy to see how conventions, orthodoxies, and authority could seem to be part of the cheap masquerade of the world of illusion and error - and how maddening such a view must be to the authorities" (qtd. in Miller 175).
Works cited:
Atwood, Margaret. Alias Grace. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003.
. "In Search of Alias Grace: Writing Canadian Historical Fiction." American Historical Review, vol. 103, no. 5, pp. 1503-16, 1998.
. "Letter from G. Duggan Esq. to J. Skelton. Toronto (City) August 11, 1843." Random House, Inc. 17 May 2006. 25 Dec. 2009.
<http://www.randomhouse.com/boldtype/0597/atwood/letter.html>
Knelman, Judith. "Can We Believe What the Newspapers Tell Us? Missing Links in Alias Grace." University of Toronto Quarterly: A Canadian Journal of the Humanities, vol. 68, no. 2, pp. 677-86, Spring 1999.
March, Cristie. "Crimson Silks and New Potatoes: The Heteroglossic Power of the Object Atwood's Alias Grace." Studies in Canadian Literature/Etudes en Littérature Canadienne, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 66-82, 1997.
Miller, Ryan. "The Gospel According to Grace: Gnostic Heresy as Narrative Strategy in Margaret Atwood's Alias Grace." Literature & Theology: An International Journal of Religion, Theory, and Culture, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 172-87, June 2002.
Silveira da, Alicione Cunha. "One Story and a Thousand and One Threads: Rediscovering History, Creating Stories in Margaret Atwood's Alias Grace." Interfaces Brasil/Canadá, no. 6, 2006. 25 Dec. 2009.
<http://www.revistabecan.com.br/arquivos/1157683635.pdf>
Spence, Jonathan. "Margaret Atwood and the Edges of History." American Historical Review, vol. 103, no. 5, pp. 1522-25, 1998.
Atwood describes how she became interested in Grace Marks' story and the creation process of the novel. Susanna Moodie's memoirs 'Life in the Clearings', which contain descriptions of Moodie meeting Grace, as well the story of the murder, became Atwood's first incentive to investigate the story. She admits that aside from numerous letters with different - often contradictory accounts - a lot of evidence was missing. Therefore she allowed herself to fill in the gaps with her imagination. It is perhaps interesting, how Atwood recollects her own attitude towards Moodie's account from the time she first read it: "being young, and still believing that 'non-fiction' meant 'true' I didn't question it" (1513). This applied to Alias Grace sheds a totally new light on it. The title reads "A Novel" - shall we assume this means "not true"? Evidence certainly is there, which means it IS real, or true. But to what extent the evidence depicts the true? In appendix 1 I have attached a copy of a letter that Margaret Atwood discovered during her research. The letter, written by a friend of Thomas Kinnear to his relatives in Scotland is biased towards the culpability of McDermott, whereas "The woman Grace Marks declares she knew nothing of the murder of the housekeeper, but she saw and heard the murder of Mr. Kinnear, & that McDermott shot him in hopes of getting some money" (Atwood "Letter"). The letter is interesting to read when we think of her equal to McDermott's punishment, which Grace initially received for - as the letter claims - being only a witness.
Bearing in mind all the mysteries and discrepancies in evidence as well as the narrative - for Atwood herself admits that Grace has "strong motives to narrate but also strong motives to withhold; the only power left to her" - I will attempt analysis of some of the criticism that the novel received while considering its multilevel patchwork design ("In Search" 1515). Before I move on to that however, I would like to present another view on collecting evidence and writing history - this time a historian's, rather than Novelist's point of view. Jonathan Spence who is a Sterling Professor of History at Yale University, says that recovering information from the past is not the only job of a historian. The major part of the quest is trying to figure out whether such information - of which there is plenty - can be considered "a fact or a reliable piece of evidence". In his review of Atwood's work - 'Margaret Atwood and the Edges of History' - he draws a parallel between the work of a writer historian and a writer novelist: "the novelist can have a snowfall or earthquake virtually whenever he or she chooses (...) whereas the historian seeks clear proof that snow did fall on such and such a day or that the earth did quake and open" ( Spence 1522). But what if we can not find the strong evidence, what if we are not able to connect the traces? Are we - as knowledge and truth seekers - supposed to abandon the quest or fill in the gaps with highest possible proximity? In either case we ourselves are shaping the history. The underlying thread of making up and sewing up runs through the novel, showing how the truth is created.
The image of Grace stitching quilt patterns recurs throughout the novel. This mirrors the multi-style design of the narrative, which in turn reminds us that a story is made up of many different little parts which do not necessarily always fit. And if they do not fit, it is up to the person sawing it up to make sure they fit. It also brings the image of kaleidoscope - where the little pieces form a different pattern each time they come together. Atwood uses this metaphor to remind her readers that history might have looked different if it was told (stitched) by another person. And again there arises the question of the border between truth and non-truth, that one step which makes reality fiction. I deliberately did not want to use word 'false' in the above sentence for it is not the question of true or false I'm trying to address, but more the level of truthfulness in truth. As Alicione Cunha da Silveira in his essay 'One story and a thousand one threads' concisely puts it: "Atwood creates a plural text that questions conventions and challenges stereotypical presuppositions, such as those of discursive categories of genre and gender, while subverting traditional modes of perception" (299). As I already mentioned above, due to Grace's situation and history, her version of the events may not be the ultimate truth, but serve rather as a check board - a kind of guide diagram, to which remaining bits and pieces are to be compared and matched.
Silveira also touches on the problem of gender, or more precisely the faultiness of the female gender and its result in delivering the right message. It is generally known that the status of women - and whatever they had to say - was much lower than that of men in the 19th century. Even worse if one was a housekeeper or an underclass servant. Despite her position and all the favours that Nancy Montgomery received from the master, her death was not even consider worthy enough to start a trial - even if it had been just to find out the murderer. Now, when we consider the status of Grace Marks, it becomes apparent that neither the court nor the newspapers would take into consideration whatever she had to say. This, together with the fact that storytelling was her only power, Grace's account is vulnerable to manipulation. And I would assume every sane person in such a situation would be willing to use this power, in order to better their lot if they could.
Atwood, on top of this, makes us question Grace's sanity from the onset - we see her falling into a fit on the approach of a doctor in a lunatic asylum. Whether her fear is real or totally made up remains a mystery. And here again we are left in the dark whether Grace is a cunning and intelligent character thrown into this institution by an unfortunate sequel of events, or if she is a cunning and intelligent character who actually committed the deed but managed to twist the entire situation to her advantage and not get executed, or whether she really is mentally insane. The novel never seems to give an answer to these questions, again leaving the reader pondering upon relations between truth and circumstance.
In addition to that, Silveira says that "the inter-textual juxtaposition of several historical documents and classical literary works with a post-modern narrative disrupts traditional modes of expression" (302). This makes the novel a one intricate web of links and paths to follow, and not only on the semantic level, but more realistically on the surface level too. Different structures and styles of texts, and even some pictures, are put together to make up one totally unique piece. And in between the lines (or the pieces) it is suggested that this one unique entity - the physical appearance of the book as well as the content of the story - might have been completely different provided different circumstances, or different time, or place, or a different weaver.
'Can We Believe What the Newspapers Tell Us?' is a very interesting research by Judith Knelman, in which she investigates how biased the newspapers of mid 19th century were. Because their readers were the upper classes, the articles were written from their point of view, demonising the savage underclass. Knelman (678-9) cites article excerpts from a few magazines contemporary with Grace's case, which style is far from objective:
- "Our publication of this day is stained by an account of one of the most atrocious, diabolical acts that ever disgraced this or any other country" (Star, 2 August 1843)
- "[Grace] appears totally uneducated, and her countenance utterly devoid of expression. She looked around her with a degree of stupid apathy, and seemed completely unconscious of the awful situation in which she stood" (Star, 5 August 1843)
- "[Examiner] seldom had to record a more atrocious and cold blooded case of murder than has recently been perpetrated in this city" (Examiner, 2 August 1843)
Such portrayal must have had an enormous impact on the sentence - the lawyers and the judge were, after all, the upper class, with the same concerns and views about the servants. Knelman says that this prejudice has its roots in the fear of what the entire working class might now do - there might be a revolt or some servants may take example of McDermott and Grace, for no one really knew their motives, nor anyone cared to find out - debasing the serving class to sheer animal instincts.
Not only did the newspapers serve wrong to the working class but also at that time the entire "English justice system operated in the context of a mythology that decreed some kinds of murder to be worse than others" (Knelman 678). And just as wives were accountable to their husbands, the servants had to be faithful to their masters. Hence the slightest wrongdoing against someone of a higher social position deemed the culprit more guilty. And very often - in a case of big social gap between the victim and the assailant - the latter had no chance to defend themselves. Unfortunately, this system did not work the other way round. Therefore the constant abuse of the weaker, or socially disadvantaged, was generally accepted in the society. Also the bias of the press was not something unthinkable as it would be now, for "the press labels offenders according to the belief system that obtains" (678). Nowadays the abundance of media directed at different target groups might have been able to boycott the upper class and help Grace out. Those days however were clearly the days of the upper classes, and so the word "justice" carried a totally different meaning in the view of the arguments above - the upper class advantages and the press merely recording the trends in society. It constituted a vicious circle where the voice of - and the truth of - the disadvantaged had no place to be. Can we then believe the newspapers - the historical artefacts on the basis of which the history is written down? Well, I guess it depends on our frame of reference - we surely can built our own history on it, if it suits us.
The novel being enigmatic as it is, takes a lot of its mysticism from the hypnotism. The tension and mystery present in the moment when Dr. Jerome DuPont conducts the neuro-hypnosis constitutes the climax of the story. Grace does not speak in her own voice but in the voice of "an alter ego formed after a traumatic experience involving the death of her only friend" (682). Knelman points out that a medical explanation of such an event was not known to the contemporaries of Grace's doctors. And the fact that the hypnotist turns out to be an old acquaintance Jeremiah makes the riddle even more intriguing. I see several new possible versions of the story here. Firstly, when Grace recognised Jeremiah, she might have played the whole scene and no hypnosis really took place. For why would DuPont succeed, whereas others could not, especially after a secret communication with Grace? The moment posed a perfect opportunity to acquit herself and lead everyone into even deeper confusion, perhaps even scaring the wiser ones with an element of sorcery - since the occurrence of split personality was not well known in those days. Secondly, it might have been Jeremiah who devised the entire plan and maybe even committed the murder himself. If he was a successful hypnotist, he might have entered Grace's memory right after the crime he possibly committed and entirely erase it. Jeremiah was visiting Kinnear's household to sell goods but he might have been secretly seeing Nancy. He even might have fathered her baby and hence the motives for a murder. To me this version seems much more plausible than whatever motives Grace might have had. We read that she actually enjoyed her living in the house: "And there we were, in a kind of harmony; and the evening was so beautiful, that it made a pain in my heart, as when you cannot tell whether you are happy or sad; an dI thought that if I could have a wish, it would be that nothing would ever change, and we could stay that way forever" (230).
There are more unanswered questions which somewhat point to this interpretation: what is the function of the Jeremiah character? Why does he disappear for years just to suddenly reappear as a doctor - Grace's doctor? Why introduce the motif of hypnosis at all? And why through this mysterious character? Ryan Miller in 'The Gospel according to Grace' gives us some answer to the first question:"it soon becomes clear that what Jeremiah really sells in the novel is knowledge"(176). What he means by knowledge should be understood in a spiritual terms, rather than in practical - but I will expand on it further in the following paragraph. For the time being I will only add that - in my opinion -"selling knowledge" is not the only function for which this character was invented. As for the second query the answer poses itself if we assume Jeremiah's guilt in the murder - despite his excellent hypnotic skills it would have been wise to disappear for a while, just in case. Why does he come back then, and why under a different name? Well, again it is safer to assume a pseudonym, or an entirely new personality, when one has something on their conscience. In fact, the wisest option would have been to never show up but then again - since Jeremiah is the spiritual "knowledge" - it would make sense that he wanted to compensate for his sins and at least try to help poor Grace out of her miserable situation. Lastly, if he would not be reintroduced, we wouldn't have yet another riddle to solve. And why hypnosis at all? Perhaps to account for the missing gaps or perhaps to shed a new light on Grace's culpability in the view of biased evidence on one hand and the possibility of erasing memories through hypnosis on the other. Whichever the case, we can neither trust the evidence, nor the main character and her memories - provided of course that she is sincerely honest. Knelman says though that "once Atwood imposes casual shape on the past, discrepancies can have meaningful coexistence"(684). In other words, what can not be read out of straightforward narrative, can be found in the riddles. The gaps between words and their meaning are further explored by Cristie March, who applies Bakhtin theory of heteroglossia to Alias Grace. But before I turn to exploring the truth and meaning contained in words and in the gaps between the words and characters, I promised to have a look at Ryan Miller's notion of Jeremiah as a spiritual knowledge seller.
Here I came across a view which - as the author claims - is original and totally new in the Alias Grace criticism. Yet another element incorporated into the semantic patchwork of the narrative - Gnosticism, or in Grace's words: "Who decided?" (222). And although the novel may not overtly suggest such reading of it, Miller concludes it on three basis:
- the novel's repeated use of water an dreams to imply (...) unconsciousness and (...) chaos or hell
- explicit ties between spirit and gnosis: Grace is aware of being torn open
- the novel hints at Gnostic cosmology, describing the night sky not as heaven or hell but as 'the outer darkness, with the wailing and the gnashing of teeth, where God was not'. (Miller 175)
And in order to understand the "significance of Grace's final Tree of Paradise design" in the light of Gnosticism and as a narrative device - argues the author - "an understanding of Gnosticism is essential"(175). For the reader's reference, in appendix 2 I cite a compact definition by Margaret Anne Doody, quoted by Miller in his essay, which presumably suits best his outlook on the case.
When Grace arrives in the Kinnear's house, she asks about a painting and learns about the biblical story of Susannah - a woman who was fancied by elder men and then accused by them for committing adultery. Grace however is surprised to hear that this is a biblical story for - as she claims - she knows the Bible thoroughly and never heard this story before. When Thomas Kinnear explains to her that some stories were decided not to go into Bible, Grace innocently questions "Who decided?" and later draws a conclusion that "like everything men write down (...) they got the main story right but some of the details wrong" (459). The significance of this episode has a double meaning. Firstly, since it happens right after Grace's arrival in the Kinnear's house, it parallels her story and foreshadows future events - i.e. being accused by those who desired her, or more precisely by the class of the stronger, older, more advantaged and supposedly wiser. Secondly, Grace's reaction - "Who decided?" - shows us her folks wisdom and points towards her ability to question the unreasonable. Her objectivity thus, inclines that the entire narrative is more plausible when looked at from Grace's point of view.
When it comes to Jeremiah, aside from my views stated above, his being the source of spiritual "knowledge" - as Miller argues - confirms his important role in the novel (however contradictory to my assumptions of his possibly taking part in the murders) and further points to the Gnostic attitude that Atwood implies in her work. When Jeremiah - who is American - tells Grace that he "was lately down in the States where [he] can buy notions cheap and sell them up here for more", the meaning of 'notions' can be understood both in terms of goods as well as of ideas. Considering his nationality, we may presume that he indeed tries to introduce the "Gnostic perspective" and "questioning the authority of Scripture (...) present in then-contemporary America" (Miller 177). On top of that, Miller, to prove his point, says that Jeremiah's statement:"A faithless preacher with a good manner and voice will always convert more than a limp-handed long-faced fool, no matter how Godly" (Alias 267) displays contempt for "orthodox religion and mirrors Grace's own response"(Miller 177). Furthermore, I see a connection between Jeremiah's words and the way a history is shaped - through skills of lawyers, press and storytellers - including Grace and Atwood herself.
There is one last point I would like to address in this paper, namely the workings of Bakhtin's theory of heteroglossia as presented by Cristie March in her essay "Crimson Silks and New Potatoes'. A quick look in dictionary.com and we learn that heteroglossia is "the existence of two or more voices within a text, esp. conflicting discourses within a linguistic activity as between the narrative voice and the characters in a novel". March applies this theory to characters and objects: what is their meaning as opposed to their actual shape and how the characters communicate and misunderstand through those gaps in meaning. The two most apparent instances where we see this theory at work are Nancy's clothing and the objects sitting between Dr.Jordan and Grace during their interviews.
Grace notices that Nancy wears clothes suited for a lady, which already creates a class tension between them, although both are, in fact, servants. Soon Grace finds out about the affair and looses respect for Nancy. And so the ladyness labelled to Nancy by her clothes acquires an ironic meaning. When Nancy dies, Grace takes her clothes and wears her dress. This, on one hand, projects Nancy onto Grace - both were maids and both desired by their master, and on the other hand dooms Grace during her trial, making her look like a cold blooded murderess who did not even hesitate to steal a dad woman's clothing. We learn however, the truth is different - Grace took the clothes because Nancy would not need them any more and so they go to waste. Grace too attaches a great meaning to the clothing for she left the dress Nancy was sewing recently because she felt it was too close and important to her. In this manner, as March concludes: "Nancy's clothing becomes a morally and socially coded object which leads to a further coding of language concerning Grace" (70). When it comes to the objects that Dr. Jordan places in front of Grace to induce association and thus elicit a confession, he achieves no more than learning about cooking methods. Grace on the other hand can't understand his insistence on always bringing those fruit and vegetables. Dr Jordan "imposes specific limits" on what Grace has to say and on her interpretation of the objects and stories he occasionally tells her, thus "forcing it into significations of mental condition without regard for the speaker's conceptualization of meaning" (74). The meaning they both associate with these objects is totally different and therefore communication can not take place. Instead misunderstanding is creating the story and in that way - writing the history.
I have so far presented different approaches and interpretations in deciphering Alias Grace. In conclusion, I hope I managed to reveal that establishing what is true, or how much truthfulness there is in each piece of this patchwork, is not entirely possible. Not entirely, however to some degree - yes. But only when we assume a fixed point of reference and that in turn, is always a subjective personal biography of each one of us, and can only form fixed links with the environment, or other's stories, on a superficial level. There is one more detail regarding my essay I would like to comment on at the end - after proof reading I realised that its structure is pretty much a patchwork itself. This was a totally unintentional effect, but taking into account the shape of the researched work and the subject(s) of the research I decided to leave it as it is, with a great hope that the reader will find their own links and connections and will make up their own opinion about the subject.
Appendices:
Appendix 1:
From G. Duggan Esq.
To J. Skelton
Toronto (City) August 11, 1843
Dear Sir
From a long and happy acquaintance with Mr. Thomas Kinnear, and being his professional friend in this Colony I feel obliged to (enter) upon to me a most painful task and one would that no cause existed for--but my duty to you and his other relatives renders it unavoidable to me & I trust that He on whom all may lean for support in the hour of deep distress & afflictions may sustain his aged and affectionate Mother and his other relatives under the (trying tidings?) of which this is the harbinger. I need hardly tell you poor Thomas Kinnear is now no more. He died on the 29th July & by the hand of ruffian murderers. An ungrateful & wretched villain of a Servant man named James McDermott perpetrated the foul deed on the evening of the day above. The details are too horrible, too painful to the feelings of humanity to (enter) upon, & too dreadful for his surviving relatives to listen to, alas it must be disclosed sooner or later.
The brief outline is that he (TK) had been at this place for two days (on business?) and it was expected on his return he (would) bring (home) money with him. He had three servants the man McDermott & woman calling herself Grace Marks (both of whom were only three weeks in his employment) and an old faithful housekeeper named Nancy Montgomery all of whom he left at his farm. On his return home he (missed?) his housekeeper Nancy and enquired where she had gone to. The other two pretended she was gone to a neighbour at a distance to visit a person very ill. He seems then to have thought little about it & spoke about getting his tea & was in the (meantime? ) reclining on a sofa with a book --it seems McDermott called him from the Hall and poor fellow he came to the Hall with the book in hand and the ruffian instantly discharged a gun at him shot him dead upon the spot. He seems to have spoken only in a dying groan of oh, oh & have (pressed?) the book to his bleeding bosom & expired.
The wretch shortly after took the book and placed in a small (apartment?) in the cellar and he & the servant Grace Marks ( ) ( ) the night stole as many clothes and light articles ( ) ( ) as they could conveniently take in a one horse carriage & took poor Kinnear's horse & carriage & the above property and absconded to (the?) United States on Sunday following (being?) the next day the house was found vacant and suspicion was awakened & search made & the body found in the cellar. No tidings were to be had of any of the servants but doubts were entertained (as) to the fate of Nancy. (Strict?) search was made but in vain. On Monday further search was made & by accident a tub in the cellar was overturned and beneath it & as it were ( ) it was found the body of the murdered Nancy Montgomery.
She had been strangled a bandage was tightly & strongly tied on her neck & in that manner the unfortunate woman was murdered but the guilty parties were promptly followed & apprehended & are now in jail here and will shortly be tried for their diabolical deeds. The woman Grace Marks declares she knew nothing of the murder of the housekeeper, but she saw and heard the murder of Mr. Kinnear, & that McDermott shot him in hopes of getting some money. I send a newspaper herewith in which some of the particulars are therein. I have given directions that an inventory be taken of all the property and effects and examined myself minutely for a will among his papers. The only document of the kind found is a draft of a deed a copy of which I herewith enclose. It will be desirable that some person should administer to his Estate or that some of his relatives should come out and look after in the meantime. I shall keep watch on it and endeavour to keep every article forthcoming The Coroner is at present in charge and he is acting under my advice. I shall be happy to be useful in any way in my power to the relatives of one to whom I was so much attached & whom I so much respected as my worthy but departed friend Thomas Kinnear. I (intended) to have been brief & await your reply but I have perhaps indulged in expressions natural if not necessary. Deeply sympathising with his afflicted relatives and endeared friends, I remain
P.S. I saw among the papers of your deceased relative a letter which he received from his mother & as recent a date as July 1st.
(Atwood "Letter")
Appendix 2:
"In general, Gnosticism depends on a binary view of the world. The individual soul, having come from the Light, is surrounded by a world of darkness and error and struggles to regain the world of light once more. Typically, the Demiurge who created this present material world is a tyrant and a deceiver. The illuminated person must not fall into the trap of believing the kind of orthodoxies held by the foolish. An alien in the world of matter, the Gnostic personality is aware of the resources of its own dynamic and Light-oriented soul. [Consequently] it is easy to see how conventions, orthodoxies, and authority could seem to be part of the cheap masquerade of the world of illusion and error - and how maddening such a view must be to the authorities" (qtd. in Miller 175).
Works cited:
Atwood, Margaret. Alias Grace. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003.
. "In Search of Alias Grace: Writing Canadian Historical Fiction." American Historical Review, vol. 103, no. 5, pp. 1503-16, 1998.
. "Letter from G. Duggan Esq. to J. Skelton. Toronto (City) August 11, 1843." Random House, Inc. 17 May 2006. 25 Dec. 2009.
<http://www.randomhouse.com/boldtype/0597/atwood/letter.html>
Knelman, Judith. "Can We Believe What the Newspapers Tell Us? Missing Links in Alias Grace." University of Toronto Quarterly: A Canadian Journal of the Humanities, vol. 68, no. 2, pp. 677-86, Spring 1999.
March, Cristie. "Crimson Silks and New Potatoes: The Heteroglossic Power of the Object Atwood's Alias Grace." Studies in Canadian Literature/Etudes en Littérature Canadienne, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 66-82, 1997.
Miller, Ryan. "The Gospel According to Grace: Gnostic Heresy as Narrative Strategy in Margaret Atwood's Alias Grace." Literature & Theology: An International Journal of Religion, Theory, and Culture, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 172-87, June 2002.
Silveira da, Alicione Cunha. "One Story and a Thousand and One Threads: Rediscovering History, Creating Stories in Margaret Atwood's Alias Grace." Interfaces Brasil/Canadá, no. 6, 2006. 25 Dec. 2009.
<http://www.revistabecan.com.br/arquivos/1157683635.pdf>
Spence, Jonathan. "Margaret Atwood and the Edges of History." American Historical Review, vol. 103, no. 5, pp. 1522-25, 1998.