Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

Please discuss the final section of The Remains of the Day here.

I finished this one and am a bit ambivalent. The writing is outstanding, but I could not seem to get under the surface of the story. The emotional distance of our narrator keeps the reader at an arm's length, which is how he keeps all in his world. He is an emotionally stunted man. I was not surprised by Miss Kenton's admission at the end; it was pretty obvious. But, for the life of me, I can not figure out why she had such feelings. The lack of any real growth in insight by the narrator was heart breaking. He is definitely the ideal servant, taking his self-worth from the significance of those he serves, a rather harmless parasite. But, at the end, he can neither mourn what was lost nor contentedly rest in what was lived. He just returns to his commitment to improve as a butler by learning how to banter. He has shrunk his identity so that it can be confined within the confines of a particular role. How sad! Maybe the reason the narrator always felt like a stranger to me is because he remaned a stranger to himself.

Yes @Irene: I completely agree with you.
Mr.Stevens gave very little importance on his personal life. He made it very clear that whatever may happen but his duty to his master is first and it is the only way to be a great butler. And his personal emotions are not to be showed at all.
I liked Miss.Kenton, who worked hard but showed her emotions and thoughts to others. She , in several points tried to bring out the thoughts of Mr.Stevens but was not succeeded.

Well all other characters were fine and i liked the journey of the great butler. (except the talk regarding the "great butlers" and i do not know whether Mr.Stevens is a great butler or not )

In some ways, Mr. Stevens appears to be the antithesis of his father. We have scant info about the senior Mr.Stevens. The story of the drunks in the car is the flagstone image of dignity for the narrator. It is a wonderful image of a man who can do the "right" thing, the truly courageous thing with little fanfare. But, our narrator never does the courageous thing, only the safe thing. He thinks that by remaining aloof and by fulfilling all that is expected by his employer, he is a man of "dignity". Does any reader agree that Mr. Stevens has embodied dignity as he describes it? Rather than a truly great man who serves as a butler, he turns out to be the picture of a "company man". I wonder what sort of man the senior Mr. Stevens was at home, as a father. Was he a man of dignity in the everyday, or was he larger than life in his son's mind, another "company man" who sacrificed his family for his job? And, what does Miss Kenton see in Mr. Stevens that would keep her pining, wondering after so many years?

Pallavi wrote: "i do not know whether Mr.Stevens is a great butler or not"

I'm inclined to say not. What he regards as his ultimate success - choosing to serve instead of going to his father's deathbed - seems to me ultimate failure, not just personally, but professionally. Did he really hide his emotions so well as he thought through all that?

At the risk of generalization, I was thinking this is actually a very Asian story. The protagonist is British, but the author is Japanese. I say this because I'm currently reading The Jewel in the Crown which is about British rule over India. The Asian style of communication is reputedly indirect, and both this book and The Jewel in the Crown are told indirectly through very slow revelations, not a traditional narrative Western plot.

The only other book I have read by this author is "Never Let Me Go" which has a similar narrative style, that of a young woman telling the story of her life in looping stories which gradually reveal key truths about her and her current situation. Somehow, I was immediately connected with that narrator, feeling as if I were sitting across a table sharing a cup of coffee with her as she told me of her life. But, this one just never connected with me. The narrator was always some very distant, slightly unrelatable figure. I kept waiting for some striking revelation as came in "Never Let Me Go", but it never happened. I can't quite figure out what I am supposed to learn about the narrator, what all this reflecting is supposed to slowly bring to light.

I think that's kind of the point, that the narrator is so distant and aloof. How can you connect with a person who doesn't connect with anyone? I think that's what makes this book so great. You're not supposed to get under the surface. We can guess at all the underlying emotions and psychological reasons for his behaviour but nothing is ever revealed because he doesn't think that way.
It's kind of amazing how devoted he is to his job, although it's hard to call it a job. It defines his entire life. Even though his life seems empty to the reader he was completely fulfilled.
Stepping back from the heavy issues, I laughed out loud several times during this book, mostly when he was discussing the bantering. I found it hilarious and tried to read some funny parts out loud, but it was hard to get the joke if you weren't reading the book.
I liked this book for what it was, not what I hoped it would be or what I expected it to be.

Lauren, Thanks for those comments. I was thinking that I was missing the point. But, you gave me hope that I did indeed understand it.

Lauren, thanks for mentioning the humor. I forgot about that, and as I recall, I laughed out loud at parts too.

And when he stopped in that little village and they all thought he was some important gentleman? So funny. I also liked some of his more awkward moments with miss Kenton. He really was clueless.

I think there is a subtle shift in perspective. Early on, he believes Miss Kenton has wasted her life by leaving Darlington Hall. Yet at the end of the book (and four days later) it is Stevens who has missed the opportunities and realizes the emptiness which he inhabits.

Mike wrote: "I think there is a subtle shift in perspective. Early on, he believes Miss Kenton has wasted her life by leaving Darlington Hall. Yet at the end of the book (and four days later) it is Stevens wh..."


Exactly.... Mr. Stevens for his whole life thinks he is doing right by doing his duty to Lord Darlington. And goes on with his idea of life. It would have been right forever if he hadn't realize a lose at the end.But he felt a lose at the end, he felt a doubt about his life that he lead till that moment.
One more thing i noticed was his loyalty was very strong towards Lord Darlington but not so strong for new American Owner. He didn't try to be perfect with new master. Why was that? Was he already,unconsciously feeling tired of trying to be a great butler? Those aspects depends on the reader to understand.

I was not certain that he did infact realize that his life was somehow empty at the end. Yes, he did tear up when Miss Kenten confessed her attraction to him. But, he leaves us planning to practice the art of banter more diligently so that he can do things better. Does he really want to have what the older, retired butler has, some sense of human connection, or is he returning to rededicate himself to perform more effectively as a butler because this "banter" seems to be expected by Farraday?

Maybe he just has a little crack in his armour at the end. A crack which he quickly plasters over with his plans to rededicate himself to bantering correctly. Because if he ever admitted to himself that his entire life was empty, well, what then? Much easier to fluff that thought away.
I think his loyalty diminished towards his American master because Farraday just didn't get it. He had no notion of what a proper English butler is supposed to be so Mr Stevens may think his efforts are slightly wasted on him. OR it could be that he feels it is disloyal to Lord Darlington to be too perfect for Farraday.
I liked how it was slowly revealed throughout the book that Lord Darlington was not exactly on the right side politically. Even in his journal Stevens hesitated to come right out and say that his master was misguided in his beliefs. Yet he was still loyal, explaining away certain events to make his old master appear like an unwitting pawn in others' agendas. Lord Darlington was dead and Stevens still wouldn't dream of speaking a bad word against him. That's loyalty!

Was this loyalty to the person or position of Darlington? Or was it Stevens' need to be aligned with what is right. He kept talking about how he played an important part in significant matters of world affairs by being a butler. If Darlington was actually working toward destructive ends, what does that say about Stevens and the value of his life's work?

You're right. Another thing that I would not want to examine too closely if I was Stevens. Introspection is not his friend. Just put on your butler's mask and turn your thoughts toward serving your master!

I saw that last line about learning to banter as hope for the character, not as him retreating under the mask once again.

Hmm interesting. I like your optimism :)
Whenever the ending of a book leaves interpretation I usually choose the happy ending. Hope it is!

Kressel wrote: "I saw that last line about learning to banter as hope for the character, not as him retreating under the mask once again."

Why did you find it hopeful?

Irene wrote: "Why did you find it hopeful?"

Because he's trying to learn how to get along better with everyone around him.

very interesting discussion - I am almost finished and have found it a very slow read. I also struggled with Never Let Me Go and also Norwegian Wood (Japanese author) - in many ways I could feel the Japanese -ness (sorry awful word but cant think of another!!) of Mr Stevens despite his essential Englishness. I have always felt the Japanese customs and traditions to be more rigid yet this fits very well with the social status and expectations of the times.
Kressel - I read The Jewel in the Crown decades ago ( could do with a re-read actually) do you find the emotions do eventually come out or remain repressed? I loved that whole series.
This is my second Ishiguro and I am not in a hurry to try another - while I can appreciate the intricacies and nuances of the characters it is so boring and slow in parts !!

Penny wrote: "Kressel - I read The Jewel in the Crown decades ago ( could do with a re-read actually) do you find the emotions do eventually come out or remain repressed?"

You're right. They do come out in the end with Daphne, but she's the most open character in the book.

Great discussion here, for sure! Everyone expressed my thoughts in one manner or another. My lingering thought after the last line was "That's it? After all of the introspection and coming to terms with things maybe not being how you always thought they were, and determining that maybe some changes need to be made, you fall to BANTER, which is completely outside your character, and want to develop it to better serve your "master," for lack of a better word? That's all you've 'learned?'" I found that very disheartening. The statements about Miss Kenton being the one who DIDN'T waste her life and maybe he just can't admit it because it's too late now to change it are very apt; after all, what DOES one do with a revelation like that at that point of life?

I found the slow unraveling of the mystery around Lord Darlington to most interesting. I like the very "gray" areas surrounding him, that there's no simple black and white when it comes to life OR politics. Maybe he didn't go about things the right way, but his motives were at least in the right vein. Although his dismissing the Jewish housemaids would certainly imply otherwise, and I think Stevens does not go into that topic as much as he might, if he were truly studying himself and his own actions (or inactions) through the years.

Anyone else find it interesting that the name is "Darlington?" He certainly seems very darling when looked at through Stevens' eyes, at least early on in the novel. He doesn't seem so darling by the end, though partly from being misunderstood.

A lot of food for thought in this little book, I must say. I wasn't expecting to think as hard as I did when I was beginning it.

Alana wrote: "I found the slow unraveling of the mystery around Lord Darlington to most interesting. I like the very "gray" areas surrounding him, that there's no simple black and white when it comes to life OR politics. Maybe he didn't go about things the right way, but his motives were at least in the right vein. Although his dismissing the Jewish housemaids would certainly imply otherwise, and I think Stevens does not go into that topic as much as he might, if he were truly studying himself and his own actions (or inactions) through the years.
"

I think the most deliberate point he was making here is that he was being influenced from outside forces, and while attempting to acclimate toward those whom he was trying to reach and compromise with. Such actions can bring about the most putrid actions from others, although completely inadvertently from individuals whom are working toward the greater good.

Politics, although subtly, played a much larger role in his story than I had come to expect. Mr. Stevens has what appears to be a very strong moral focus, but he let his duties cloud his judgement in order to make his boss happy. I think the message here is to stand up for what you believe in, and especially for what you know is right. There is some sincere regret shown in his actions, based on the way he frames the story.