Present: Barb, Julie, Katharine, Mariannick, Muriel, Peggy, Rosie, Sealia and Wendy.The Book is presented by Katharine.
Chosen as a follow-up to our observance of International Women's Rights Day, I Am, I Am, I Am is Maggie O'Farrell's astonishing memoir of the near-death experiences that have punctuated and defined her life. Katherine began by noting that the subtitle of O’Farrell’s memoire is “Seventeen Brushes With Death.” The book’s title comes from Sylvia Plath’s The Bell Jar. Whereas Plath’s novel ends: “I was, I was, I was,” O’Farrell’s ends: “She is she is she is You’re not getting her any time soon.” The ending celebrates the resilience of her severely allergic daughter, who has had a number of brushes with death.
In the different episodes where O’Farrell meets with danger, we see her as girl, woman, partner, and mother. Perhaps the most moving for Katharine was when she told how as a child in hospital, she was visited by Jimmy Saville, an entertainer who was lauded for his work with children but who later turned out to be a pedophile. He encouraged the nurse to leave her hospital room, but she refused. Was it intuition? Suspicion? Knowledge? Or was it just that she wasn’t supposed to leave the very sick child who needed round-the-clock care. She also gets lots of love when she is recovering from encephalitis. Her childhood illness fostered love of books, and ultimately her vocation as a writer.
Later O’Farrell pays tribute to carers who have helped her survive through their kindness and devotion. She describes two different kinds of carers when she gives birth for the first time. One is distant, the other teaches her about touch.
Katharine gave some biographical details, for example that the author was born in Colrane county, and her father was from Dublin. The family moved to Wales, because of the father’s lecturing position. They moved between Ireland, Wales and Scotland, so that she felt foreign or different in every country. Being Irish in Britain, she had to put up with endless Irish jokes even from teachers.
Barb said that she didn’t expect to enjoy the book but she did. Although she found O’Farrell’s experience depressing, the writing was beautiful and there was a little humour. Barb felt you could identify with her.
Julie commented on the way the narrator becomes intimate with reader. The relation she creates makes us comfortable enough to be able to hear what she says, even though she is dealing with difficult topics. There is no self pity even though she has lived through many traumatic events. Wendy thought that part of the intimacy effect comes from her admission that she’s revealing things that she has not told anyone except her husband, Will. We noticed that there’s a lot about her children in the book, but not much about Will, her husband.
Katharine liked the non-linear structure. Although the episodes can be harrowing, we know everything is okay because she is still writing. Sealia thought that the lack of chronological order reminds us of how we remember. Like in conversation or train of thought, the order didn’t seem planned… except perhaps that the two most terrible episodes involving her child self and her daughter are left to the end.
We spoke about her experience with the misogynistic doctor. Such attitudes still exist. Julie said that she herself has had two miscarriages (as well as a much-loved daughter) and that reading the book brought those experiences back. Miscarriage is a trauma that you never forget, yet it’s not something that you talk about except perhaps when you speak to someone else who has gone through it. Other women present spoke about their own experience of miscarriage and agreed that it’s something that is unspoken in our culture. Sealia found the book relatable for women in this sense. It deals with something no one talks about it, except in an apologetic way—“Just so you know … I’m not really talking to anyone about it …” Why is it such a sensitive subject? Barb felt that maybe women don’t talk about it because the feedback may not be pleasant; the experience might be minimised in some way. Our discussion about women’s health reminded Sealia of a book on this subject by Maya Dusenbery called Doing Harm: The Truth About How Bad Medicine and Lazy Science Leave Women Dismissed, Misdiagnosed, and Sick. The book looks at misogynistic practices in the health profession. Trainee health workers are taught that women’s pain and complaining is exaggerated.
Rosie liked the way O’Farrell wrote about being a teenager; the descriptions of the group and the boredom seemed true to life. We discussed the episodes when, as a teenager, she jumps into the sea in the night or she leaves home to travel and survive on her own. Was she reckless? Sealia explained that the pre-frontal cortex is not developed in young people. They think they are invincible—unless perhaps they have had a trauma, which is her case. Still, her near-death experience seems to have made her willing to take risks. Or perhaps her character—her courage and daring—helped her live when she was supposed to die. She takes the jump from the harbor when she SHOULD protect herself given her history. Doing the opposite of what is safe is a pattern in her life. She has a second child even though she nearly died with the first one.
Disappointed with her degree at Cambridge, she heads to foreign countries. She claims that such experiences abroad increase cognitive flexibility and depth, as well as integrativeness of thought. She develops the ability to take on someone else’s way of looking at things. We discussed this claim. Sealia found that there were roughly two types of students in the Study Abroad programme. The first group consists of those who want to go away to party
and don’t care about where. They don’t change much from their experience, since they stay with the same group of friends. Tourists can be the same. Then there are the students who are going abroad to learn a new language and culture. Those making an effort to learn are going to expand their minds.
Barb has problems with the idea of depth. How much depth did she gain? Isn’t it that she gets more superficial? We talked about the difference between the travellers and the stay-at-homes. Katharine’s brother lives in the same place he grew up in and has the same friends. He doesn’t see the need to travel. Some people cut ties with home and immerse themselves in another culture. Is his experience any more worthwhile? Julie has siblings who have never left the same area. Who is more fortunate? Everyone’s motivation to leave was that they are unhappy where they are.
We discussed whether some of the chapters are there as fillers? Are they all appropriate? Do they all belong in the book? For example, O’Farrell’s brush with AIDS is not personal. We agreed that the variety lightens the emotional load placed on the reader.
The events narrated are often deeply personal for the writer. We may not agree that they are all traumatic brushes with death. Sealia was taken by the story about the guys who come toward the car. She wondered whether she would have been as terrified as O’Farrell? Rosie felt that the author’s previous experience with strange men amplified the sense of danger. Past encounters raise awareness of what could go wrong.
The threats our society pose to women are certainly limiting. We are told to beware of wearing provocative clothing. There are places we are told we shouldn’t go and times (nighttime) when we shouldn’t be out. Sealia spoke about a study that recorded (through a heat map) male and female ways of looking when walking down the street. Men’s eyes were pretty much fixed on the path ahead. Women looked all over the place. The theory is that women must be constantly alert to danger. Katharine felt that women may have rejected certain gestures of protectiveness thanks to feminism. “Courteous” gestures from men may be rejected as patronising. Though some men have became less paternalistic thanks to feminism, there is now a backlash. We considered the Manosphere with its celebration of machismo and the corresponding Tradwife trend.
How does this book with its focus on traumatic experiences compare to other memoirs? Julie thinks that it has the quality of memoir in the intimacy the writer creates with reader. O’Farrell builds action through the non-linear segments. In each segment there is a rising and falling action. Sealia felt that the book felt like the sword of Damocles—it is a reminder of life’s fleeting nature. It deals with all the worry and anxiety that comes with parenthood. O’Farrell’s overwhelming fear is not for herself but for her children.
Why finish the book with her daughter’s story? Maybe her dream of a little blond girl gives some kind of answer. It’s her and not her.
The blond girl she dreams of conflates herself and daughter. Her empathy for and identification with those who suffer gives intensity to the book and draws the readers in.
