“It is only when our (novelists’) characters and events begin to disobey us that they begin to live. When Charles left Sarah on her cliff-edge, I ordered him to walk straight back to Lyme Regis. But he did not; he gratuitously turned and went down to the Dairy.”
Similarly, Ackroyd puts limits on his power as a novelist but he does not highlight any weakness in his power to control the events in the story nor does he interact directly with the reader. He has creates a conflict between reality and fiction by naming the modern day detective and his novel after the real-life architect that Dyer’s character is based on. This conflict comes to a head when Hawksmoor reads a plaque outside a church that the real-life Nicolas Hawksmoor built, which, in real life would ascribe the architecture to him. However, in Ackroyd’s novel the church was built by Dyer, so the plaque reads: “It was rebuilt by…”. So Ackroyd has acknowledged that he cannot rewrite history by writing “Nicolas Dyer” nor can he compromise the credibility of his story by writing “Nicolas Hawksmoor” and therefore keeps his fictional novel and the reality of history separate. Fowles sees his limits as the boundaries that are set by his desire to make his story credible: “possibility is not permissibility”. However, both novelists emerge as god figures because ultimately, they are in control. Fowles attempts to define his role:
“…definition of God: the freedom that allows other freedoms to exist. And I must conform to that definition. The novelist is still a god…”
The difference between the ways the two novelists go about presenting their narrative perspectives is that Ackroyd has no interruptions of the narrative and has clearer guidelines set down to define his role. His two types of narrative are clearly separated in alternate chapters and the play script appears just twice. Fowles, however, constantly raises questions about his role by directly interacting with the reader, looking at both sides and letting them be the judge:
“The novelist stands next to God. He may not know all, yet he tries to pretend he does”
He gives a contradicting but also concluding assessment of his role in the novel in the last chapter when he appears as a character again:
“..but rest assured that this personage is, in spite of appearances, a very minor figure – as minimal, in fact, as a gamma-ray particle.”
He seems to be suggesting that that his role is to be invisible but the image of the gamma ray also suggests to us that he has rendering or even utterly destructive powers as a novelist.
We have looked at the ways that the authors give their perspectives in the novels but by looking at their attitudes towards the conventional ways of writing, we gain an insight into their perspectives on their role as novelists. Having looked into the unconventional elements used by these writers, it is possible to say that they both exhibit many of the aspects of post-modernism. Many post-modern writers integrate history into their writing, as do both Ackroyd and Fowles who use the 18th and 19th centuries as settings. The historiographic characteristics of post-modern novels often involve the theme of memory and its role in history. ‘Hawksmoor’ plays on the theme of memory throughout the novel as part of Dyer’s accounts of the past in diary form. This is a very good example of some of the post-modern views on history being based on the memories of individuals and that it will always be coloured by bias (Dyer) and the selectivity of the human mind. Fowles encapsulates this in his digression from the plot in chapter 13:
“Fiction is woven into all…you do not even think of your own past as quite real…you fictionalise it…-your book, your romanced autobiography. We are all in flight from the real reality.”
Ackroyd takes the theme of memory one step further by using it on his characters. In the witness accounts of Hays’ murder it is clear that everyone had their own version of events:
“..others declared that they had observed a drunken Man by the New Church, and yet others beleeved that they had heard violent Singing in the Dusk of the Evening. All these had but a confus’d sense of Time, and it became clear that nothing was Certain.”
“But they (murderers) can never remember the actual moment of killing”
For both writers this emphasises one fundamental thought – that nothing is wrong. This seems to justify the unconventional approach they both take to writing a novel.
One of the integral features of a post-modern novel is that the text refers to itself and the author talks to the reader. Both novels, once again, show these signs; ‘Hawksmoor’ does this in a more indirect way, as it is Dyer who develops the analogy of the architectural planning of a church being like constructing a story. It even has references to a “Narrative which is hidden so that none may see it”, “ambiguous Expressions” and that “my own history is a Patten which others may follow in the far Side of Time”. This analogy is also linked to the opening of the novel where the reader is initially led to believe that Dyer is instructing someone how to write a story but it is revealed that he is talking about planning a church. However, ‘The French Lieutenant’s Woman’ is far more direct when referring to itself as Fowles takes a metaphorical step out of the novel and out of the role of storyteller, acknowledging that ‘The French Lieutenant’s Woman’ is a work of fiction. Chapter 13 is the best example of this because Fowles openly discusses how the characters develop in his mind. Ackroyd does communicate with the reader but in a much more subtle and conventional way of involving them in the plot in a way that they take an active part in solving the links between the past and the present.
The involvement of the author has other aspects of post-modernism through the unconventional way that they present their narrators. In ‘Hawksmoor’ the narrator, Nick Dyer, can be seen to be mad as the novel progresses and is therefore unreliable as a narrator. Nick Dyer is shown to be unreliable because he becomes paranoid about who knows he is involved with black magic. When he begins to suspect his co-workers, including Walter, his closest ally in the novel, the reader realises that we cannot trust his judgement and a certain level of inescapability develops because of the biased first person narrative. This contributes to the unusual relationship between the reader and narrator because although the reader continues to follow Dyer’s narrative, they develop a mental detachment from what he says and do not automatically accept anything that comes from him. This not only makes the 18th century chapters amusing but also reflects the way we look at history – with a detached and objective view, reminding us that Dyer’s narrative does represent history. One might also say that to a certain extent, Ackroyd could be seen as unreliable because he plays the lead role in portraying Hawksmoor’s madness. Fowles can also be seen as unreliable because he suggests to us that he is not in control of his characters, calling his power into question. However, he does not tell the reader this as a truthful statement, he instead gives contradicting statements about his power as a novelist. As we have already discussed, on one hand he say that the novelist stands next to God but on the other he suggests that the author can use his power to such an extent that he can seem weak when his characters no longer listen to him. These post-modern deconstructive ideas could make Fowles seem unreliable but like in ‘Hawksmoor’, it also causes a definite detachment from the plot because the reader is constantly reminded that the story is not real. He is also unreliable in his presentation of the multiple endings of the book. When he appears to have finished the novel at chapter 44, he goes on to reveal himself in chapter 45:
“I had better explain that although all that I have described in the last two chapters happened, it did not happen quite in the way you may have been led to believe.”
This allows him to continue with his alternate ending of the novel but also makes us wary of the ‘truth’ about what Charles really did and how the novel will end.
The unconventional elements that these novels share all contribute to a post-modernist self-consciousness that is clear in the narrative. The inter-textual styles of the two authors is no exception as they refer to other existing works of fiction, breaking the sense of reality about the stories by reminding the reader that this novel is fictional too. Interestingly, both novels refer to the same ‘Faust’ myth or one of the variations of the myth in text form. In ‘Hawksmoor’, both Dyer and the modern day Thomas Hill read it. This seems to be some reference to the dark side of the novel because the myth is that Dr Faustus sells his soul to the devil for earthly power and riches, which intrigues both Nick and Tom. In ‘The French Lieutenant’s Woman’ it is referred to in the context of Sam’s betrayal of his master, using the moral tale behind the Faust myth. There is far more inter-textuality in ‘The French Lieutenant’s Woman’ than in ‘Hawksmoor’, as Fowles uses epigraphs at the beginning of every chapter, normally taken from non-fictional or fictional literature from the Victorian era, for example, Hardy, Tennyson and Darwin. These often pre-empt what will happen or promote some theme that is surfacing in the novel. Fowles also refers to the La Roncière Trial, a real life documented trial that Dr Grogan uses to show Charles that there are other manipulative woman like Sarah. Inter-textuality is used in the two novels when the themes of the texts that are incorporated, coincide with those of the novel. However, this would not be used in conventional novels because it breaks down the barrier between reality and fiction. Inter-textuality is not a big part of ‘Hawksmoor’ and has little effect on it as a work of fiction, which suggests that Ackroyd has not deliberately sought to be post-modernistic and only has some aspects of a post-modern novelist
The unconventional approach that both writers take to the plot is also post-modernistic. Most notably, the endings of the two novels are unusual. In ‘Hawksmoor’, Ackroyd does not follow the conventional form of ‘beginning, middle, and end’ because there is no concluding side to the plot with no answers given and no murderer found. It resembles an existentialist ending because we do not know what happens at the end and the reader is left to decide. On top of this, Ackroyd runs two different plots simultaneously in alternate chapters and appears to have them merge at the end of the novel. Fowles’ plot is unconventional because it is not linear, in contrast with what novels would have been like in the period in which it is set. He does show signs of a conventional story with a plot that is much clearer than ‘Hawksmoor’ but he also runs several parts of the plot at the same time like Ackroyd. This is particularly noticeable between chapters 23 and 28 when Fowles uses alternate and short chapters to further each part of the plot involving Charles, Ernestina and Sam. For ‘The French Lieutenant’s Woman’, the mould-breaking aspects of the novel reflect on the theme of the plot as it is about certain people who all attempt to break the moulds of society. The reoccurring Victorian theme of duty that appears in the plot also reflects the idea of the duty of the novelist – the duty that Fowles suggests he is not conforming to. Before ‘ending’ the novel at chapter 44, he uses the pre-emptive epigraph about duty to make the reader ask whom it applies to (they later find out that it is Fowles who is not performing his duty). For Ackroyd, the unconventional plot is not so directly used to reflect on what is happening, although there are suggestions of the age of enlightenment and mould breaking through Dyer’s rejection of Christianity. The reason that Ackroyd’s plot is unusual is that he has a strong theme of time running through the novel and this is reflected in his treatment of the plot.
The difference between the implementation unconventional aspects by the two novelists comes down to the way in which they embrace post-modernism. Fowles is more deliberate and open about the way he breaks the conventional rules of writing a novel and I think that he is deliberately adopting a post-modernistic approach. The way that he does not simply break the rules, but questions them by contradicting himself and leaving the reader to decide, suggests that he is more obviously breaking the rules to be post-modernistic. Ackroyd, however, is more direct about what rules he breaks and it is clear that he recognises his limitations are concreted. Unlike Fowles, Ackroyd refuses to confuse the reader by making a blend of what is real and what is not. When he comes to a point where reality and fiction could clash, he simply leaves it blank: “It was rebuilt by…”. Stating what the rest of the plaque said would either make it seem like Ackroyd was contradicting history or it would undermine the story he has created. However, when Fowles confuses reality and fiction he does this in a way that leaves the question of whether the characters in the novel exist or not, up to the reader:
“Mary’s great-great-granddaughter, who is twenty-two years old this month I write in, much resembles her ancestor; and her face is known over the entire world, for she is one of the more celebrated younger English film actresses.”
The way that Sarah goes to live with the real-life ‘Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood’ also leaves the reader confused as to whether Sarah and therefore all the other characters really exist.
Both novelists experiment with such conventional certainties as time, neither novels treating it in a linear way and both seeing it as flexible. This attitude would not normally be addressed by writers, which this makes their perspectives on time unconventional. Both novels can be seen to have two time periods: ‘The French Lieutenant’s Woman’ has the 19th century as the setting of the novel but also the present as the time in which Fowles is writing the novel. ‘Hawksmoor’ has the past as Nick Dyer’s narrative in the 18th century and the present as narrated by Ackroyd. The fact that they both have two times in the plot allows the authors to create links between them. Ackroyd uses cohesion between chapters to link the time periods, having the last words of one chapter always linking with the first few words of the next, to create a strange tie between the present and the past. These links also include the reoccurring theme of dust, which is noticeable because there is a reference to it in nearly every chapter. The relevance of dust is that it symbolises the remnants of the past. Nick Hawksmoor even picks up on this link as he carries out his investigation:
“..as he took a piece of earth and rubbed it between his fingers, he imagined himself tumbling through the centuries to become dust or clay.”
Ackroyd also uses many other devices to link the two periods like similar names, for example, Mrs Best/West, the two Thomas Hills and the two tramps called Ned. These links between the two times mean that the reader looks for the similarities between the two lead characters, which eventually merge at the end of the novel. It also reflects the motives behind Dyer’s use of black magic because he wishes to create an eternal existence for himself through his churches:
“..every straight line is enrich’d with a point at Infinity and every Plane with a line of Infinity…I have built an everlasting Order, which I may run through laughing: no one can catch me now.”
‘The French Lieutenant’s Woman’ has a different separation between time periods, so the links between them are also different. Instead of providing subtle links between the two times like Ackroyd does, Fowles makes statements about the past but from a modern perspective and thus blends the two periods. For example, when Fowles describes the Underciff, although Charles is there in the 19th century, he describes it from the 20th century: “From the air it is not very striking…”. In the 19th century, Charles could not have realistically gained an aerial view of Ware Commons. Another way Fowles links the two centuries is for example, when he describes the distance between London and Exeter:
“Exeter, a hundred years ago, was a great deal further from the capital than it is today…”
Fowles could mean this in practical terms like for example, that it is nearer now because of ease of travel or because two cities have got bigger. He could also mean it in a metaphorical way because London was so culturally far ahead of Exeter and other cities. This link comes as part of the perspective that Fowles has on the narrative of the novel as a whole. In the ‘asides’ when Fowles talks to the reader about the Victorian era, he does it in a retrospective manner because he is writing in the present.
This overview of the period means that both Fowles and the reader have 20th century attitudes to what is happening in the plot and we therefore understand what freedoms Charles and Sarah are trying to achieve, but more importantly, it causes a blend in the two time periods. The way that the two novelists have presented cohesion between separate times, once again, reveals the differences in their perspectives on breaking the rules. Ackroyd clearly separates the two periods in the odd and even numbered chapters, with only a few threads of associations to link the different chapters. Fowles, on the other hand, creates a curious blend as he brings in 20th century sensibilities to a 19th century setting.
There are many examples of how the two authors view time as flexible when writing a novel. Firstly, both show confusion of time in their novels. Time is constantly confused in ‘Hawksmoor’, as Dyer often has sudden flashbacks and will spontaneously interrupt himself to start describing his past. Both the modern day Ned and Hawksmoor also experience confusion of time, which Ackroyd associates with madness. At one point, Hawksmoor appears to have gone back in time to when things in London were different:
“‘Where is the zero meridian?’… The old man pointed to the other side of the summit. ‘It’s over there.’
But when Hawksmoor came to that place, he found nothing…and saw only dirt and stones.”
In ‘Hawksmoor’, the confusion of time is closely related to the historiographic elements and the theme of memory because it also involves the witness accounts on the night of the murder and how they had a “confus’d sense of Time”. Fowles also confuses time in ‘The French Lieutenant’s Woman’ when he effectively restarts events at the end of the novel to perform his alternate ending:
“So let us kick Sam out of his hypothetical future and back into his Exeter present.”
Fowles’ perspective as seen through the presentation of his novel, is that he must challenge the idea that time is a road where you know exactly what has happened and is going to happen. Similarly, Ackroyd breaks the linear flow of time by having the present and the past seemingly interact with one another, with Dyer shaping the events for Hawksmoor and the two characters merging at the end. There are also many indicators that reflect the way that the writers both play with time. When Charles visits the prostitute at her house, he calms her baby using his watch:
“He groped for his watch, freed its chain from his waistcoat and dangled it over the child.”
This could be an image suggesting what the future could be for the child or indeed, Charles. Fowles also gives warnings for when he is altering time by creating images of toying with time. When Fowles effectively travels back in time to become the character of the bearded man, he says:
“I extract my florin, I rest it on my right thumbnail, I flick it, spinning, two feet into the air and catch it in my left hand.”
When Fowles turns back time again for his third and final ending, he reappears as a character in the plot and “makes a small adjustment to the time”. Ackroyd does not use images like Fowles does but instead uses the changes in the style of the narrative from 1st to 3rd person and from 18th century English to modern English, to indicate a change in time. Otherwise, the reasons for the confusion of time are the associations that Ackroyd suggests it has with madness. For example, as Hawksmoor’s madness increases, so too does the flexibility of time:
“..when closes his eyes at last, finds himself slipping forwards and wakes at the moment of his fall. But he goes on falling; and the afternoon changes to evening, and the shadows around Hawksmoor change.”
We can see then, that the author’s perspectives on time in ‘Hawksmoor’ are reflected in the way that he illustrates madness in the plot and you could say that if you approached the plot rationally, the novel is ultimately about madness. Fowles also relates his changes in time to his plot because it reflects the theme of the Victorian age being an age of change. Sam shows the class revolution in his exploitation of his master – Fowles even declares: “It was such an age of change! So many orders beginning to melt and dissolve.”
The authors’ varying perspectives on conventional use of time reveals an area where Ackroyd has actually, for the first time, not created limits or guidelines to what is possible. A statement about Hawksmoor’s state of mind sums this up:
“At such times the future became so clear that it was as if he were remembering it, remembering it in place of the past which he could no longer describe. But there was in any case no future and no past, only the unspeakable misery of his own self.”
Ackroyd seems to be suggesting that the past, present and future are limitless and this is very different to his post-modernistic approach to breaking the other conventional moulds of writing. The effect that Fowles’ manipulation of time has is less important than Ackroyd’s because Fowles has so frequently reminded us that ‘The French Lieutenant’s Woman’ is a work of fiction, so he can take us where he wishes.
In conclusion, the perspectives that the authors take are unconventional in the way that they present the narrative, the way that they view their role in the novel and they way that they treat time in their novels. Most of the unconventional aspects suggest that both novels exhibit many signs of post-modernism. However, ‘The French Lieutenant’s Woman’ is clearly more deliberate about the way it breaks the conventional ‘rules’ of a novel and adopts a post-modern perspective. Due to this, Fowles not only breaks the rules, but constantly contradicts them and calls them into question, making the narrative unclear. On the other hand, ‘Hawksmoor’ does not show all the signs of a post-modern novel and when Ackroyd breaks rules, he does not share it with the reader in the same way as Fowles, nor does he leave unanswered questions about his power. He does, however, leave unanswered questions in his plot and raises questions about time, which seems to be the predominant theme. Some novels may change the reader emotionally or may change their opinions but the varying perspectives that these two writers take, have big impact on the way that the reader approaches the novels. This is very useful for the novelists because it means that they can shape not only what the reader receives but also how they receive it.