ENDURING LOVE STUDY TEXT

[dusty_girl1144]

is anyone in yr 12 studying the text ENDURING LOVE?

is so. whats ur input of the story. i was kinda lost on why theres a gay relationship in it :s or what it has to do with reality.

[transgression]

Our school is not studying this text but I did read the novel as some light reading.
It
is
so
beautifully written D: I love the first few passages of the novel, hm.
I can answer the first part of what you have written. There is a homosexual relationship due to the fact that Jed suffers from de Clerambault's syndrome (it's when the person holds this delusional belief that this other person is in love with them). Thus, Jed believes that Joe is in love with him.
We are covering encountering conflict so I don't know too much about reality but from what I have read in the other threads, it might have something to do with perspectives.

[dusty_girl1144]

wow i didnt know the thing about jed... is that wat is said in the book? or is that just assumed that he suffers that syndrome?

so if we were to talk about the perspectives of reality in this book do you think it might be related to jed's vision of reality and his love for joe? is that his name? and clarissa's reality is that its all in joe's head?

[Klitz]

It should not just be assumed that Jed suffers the syndrome, but it is imperative. Erotomania, or de Clerambalts syndrome was invented by the author and since then has been adopted by psychologists. In actual fact it has caused some outrage amoungst the psychology community because the last chapter which explains in some detail the symptoms, history, etc. was actually written by McEwan.

Clarrissa believes that Jed is real, she has met him at the accident, but doesn't believe that he is following Joe, her idea that Joe is going mad is however quite rational, although Joe is right about Jed harrasing him, his obsession with Jed is very irrational. He has broken his typical daily routine, is overcome with thoughts with him and gets paranoid to the point of ruining the relationship between him and Clarrissa; this obsession over Jed greatly reflects the obsession Jed has for him.
Joe believes only what is tangible, and Clarrissa, finds truths in places where evidence is not possible, but further into the book in an arguement between Joe and Clarrissa these roles are reversed and it is Clarrissa who is asking for evidence 'have you actually seen him', and it is Joe who delves into a more delerious state and starts looking for possibilities into what isn't neccessarily there.

An area which is difficult to steer away from in the essay writing is who's reality is right and wrong, what is neccessary is to understand that all of the characters provide a different view to the events happenening around them. You need to be able to explain what their reality consists of, what drives it and possibly what are the fundimental causes for the changes in it.

Again, another thing to remember is that the book is written entirely from Joe's point of view, the chapter which is supposidly from Clarrissa's point of view is infact Joe recounting what she COULD have been thinking, it is his interpretation, not hers.

Jed's love for Joe itself, to me anyway, is not a major part of the story, but rather the effects it has, the obsession, and who else does he love. I believe that Joe is only Jeds second love, and that his first is that of a greater power, a god. Unlike Joe, god doesn't reject but excepts him, due to Jed's fantasy god is whoever he wants him to be.

Anyway I hope some of this helped, i think Enduring Love was a brilliant book, if slightly disturbing and confusing in places and i hope u get alot out of it.

[shinny]

It should not just be assumed that Jed suffers the syndrome, but it is imperative. Erotomania, or de Clerambalts syndrome was invented by the author and since then has been adopted by psychologists. In actual fact it has caused some outrage amoungst the psychology community because the last chapter which explains in some detail the symptoms, history, etc. was actually written by McEwan.

not quite right. its definitely a real illness and has occurred in real life; go wikipedia it. what DID cause the outrage was that real scientists thought the clinical report at the end of the story was actually real and based off a case study (details here: http://www.salon.com/books/log/1999/09/21/mcewan/). in terms of reality, the most amount of evidence from the book comes from joe's differing views from those around him with regard to things such as whether Jed is actually stalking him, who the assassination at the restaurant was actually intended for and whether Jed was behind it and so on. there's even a point in the book where Joe and the reader begins to question whether Jed exists or not and Joe begins to doubt his own perceptions of what has been occurring as of late

[Klitz]

Haha true, wikipedia does have its own definition, but wikipedia, which can be extreamly reliable on areas of well understood topics, but less so on foggy areas. It is unusually specific when mentioning symptoms of the disorder such as the ill misinterpreting posture or arrangement of household objects *curtains of Joes house* and states that the illness is generally restricted to those "usually of a higher social status". I think this is one of those few instances where Wiki might have failed us.

As for the website you quoted, Miller seemed amused that 'the shrinks' were taken in, rather than forwarding that it was a reality, there is no British Review of Psychiatry, and i have been lead to believe that the supposed authors of the appendix do not exist either. But yes, Ronan McIvor suggests it may be based on a case study, but this is coming from a source who concedes that he was fooled by McEwans hoax.

But all in all, i think understanding whether the disease is real or not will get any bonus marks on a SAC or exam, and that any time spent on further researching and debating it is a waste that could be spent more productively better understanding other areas.

As for reality, i think that analysing the events such as whether Joe was the intended target is just the tip of the iceburg and that more focus should be spent on comparing the different characters realities and how they change, clash and manifest, and when a reality is attacked how a character responds.

[mickey_b08]

We are studying Enduring Love and have been given the prompt:

'Whatever an individual might think, it is impossible from someone to see the world objectively and without bias.'

Task: You have read a newspaper report on a ballooning accident involving several people but only one viewpoint is repesented in it, Write a persuasive letter in response.

How would you structure this?

[dusty_girl1144]

Haha true, wikipedia does have its own definition, but wikipedia, which can be extreamly reliable on areas of well understood topics, but less so on foggy areas. It is unusually specific when mentioning symptoms of the disorder such as the ill misinterpreting posture or arrangement of household objects *curtains of Joes house* and states that the illness is generally restricted to those "usually of a higher social status". I think this is one of those few instances where Wiki might have failed us.

As for the website you quoted, Miller seemed amused that 'the shrinks' were taken in, rather than forwarding that it was a reality, there is no British Review of Psychiatry, and i have been lead to believe that the supposed authors of the appendix do not exist either. But yes, Ronan McIvor suggests it may be based on a case study, but this is coming from a source who concedes that he was fooled by McEwans hoax.

But all in all, i think understanding whether the disease is real or not will get any bonus marks on a SAC or exam, and that any time spent on further researching and debating it is a waste that could be spent more productively better understanding other areas.

As for reality, i think that analysing the events such as whether Joe was the intended target is just the tip of the iceburg and that more focus should be spent on comparing the different characters realities and how they change, clash and manifest, and when a reality is attacked how a character responds.

DUDE did u wanna tutor me for this text? LOL....are u in uni or high school?

[dusty_girl1144]

We are studying Enduring Love and have been given the prompt:

'Whatever an individual might think, it is impossible from someone to see the world objectively and without bias.'

Task: You have read a newspaper report on a ballooning accident involving several people but only one viewpoint is repesented in it, Write a persuasive letter in response.

How would you structure this?

first of all what IS the viewpoint presented in the article tho? or arnt u given it? :s

[mickey_b08]

we arn't given it 

[dusty_girl1144]

we arn't given it 

HOW CAN U WRITE A RESPONSES TO THAT??? lol

[shinny]

Haha true, wikipedia does have its own definition, but wikipedia, which can be extreamly reliable on areas of well understood topics, but less so on foggy areas. It is unusually specific when mentioning symptoms of the disorder such as the ill misinterpreting posture or arrangement of household objects *curtains of Joes house* and states that the illness is generally restricted to those "usually of a higher social status". I think this is one of those few instances where Wiki might have failed us.

actually the curtains thing was taken by McEwan from the original study done by de clerambault himself, a case where someone stalked the....french...royalty i think it was? and it was the curtain in the french palaces or something; i really dont remember the specifics. but as you said, theres really no point debating about it, i heavily doubt this will come up in any essay u write anyhow.

and about which events to analyse, well it really depends on the type of essay topic given really. i've done a couple of essays already and i've found quoting the differences in perception of events such as the restaurant shooting quite useful, since it shows that often people distort reality to their own self-interest. but if its a more 'effect' related type essay rather than a 'cause' one, then things such as the conflict that arises in the novel, and the differences in responses to attacks on one another's reality is going to be useful. I haven't gotten to doing one using evidence such as that so I'm not exactly too sure where the best evidence is for that from this text, and i tend to favour doing cause essays as they are a bit more interesting and on the philosophical side

as for structuring your letter mickey, why not just stick to the typical structure; intro, body paragraphs and conclusion. while not keeping it as rigid as an essay, u'll still need these core parts. as for the intro, try starting off by establishing your authority as someone who was part of the incident, and attack the other author's credibility through this. from there on, you could point out contradictions stated by the other author against your own account and so on

[dusty_girl1144]

Haha true, wikipedia does have its own definition, but wikipedia, which can be extreamly reliable on areas of well understood topics, but less so on foggy areas. It is unusually specific when mentioning symptoms of the disorder such as the ill misinterpreting posture or arrangement of household objects *curtains of Joes house* and states that the illness is generally restricted to those "usually of a higher social status". I think this is one of those few instances where Wiki might have failed us.

actually the curtains thing was taken by McEwan from the original study done by de clerambault himself, a case where someone stalked the....french...royalty i think it was? and it was the curtain in the french palaces or something; i really dont remember the specifics. but as you said, theres really no point debating about it, i heavily doubt this will come up in any essay u write anyhow.

yeah it was where mcewan was talking about how a french lady stalked the king. and the king sent "special messages" that only "she thought" were signs to her showing his love for her blah blah blah....

but how can u really write a persuasive peice... like if u dont know wiether the article was stating facts or false?

[Klitz]

Well if the teacher hasnt given you an actual article to work with i think thats a pretty poor effort, you wont be given such an abstract question in the exam, however it says that the article only reflects one persons account out of seven. Then the prompt goes on talking about bias so you could structure it as a letter to the editor responding that one persons account of the accident isn't enough to reflect what actually happened(Joes conviction to convince others that he wasn't the first to let go of the rope). However it would be difficult to score a high mark with a piece like that, shinjitzux's idea was good however, i seriously recomend you approach your teacher and ask for what they are looking for in the piece, make a few suggestions for a piece and get some feedback
But remember it is difficult to write a high scoring informal piece, so if it was something like a letter make sure you adopt the personality of an educated reader and not that of a disgruntled bogan, Anna Coren :smitten: and if you want to adopt the personality of one of the characters that observed the accident make sure you have enough information to be able to fill their shoes because(especially in exams) if you inappropriately adopt a persona you can lose a large amount of marks for misinterpretation.

Secondly, it doesnt matter whether the piece is fact or false, it is external to what is happening in the book, all that matters is that, as i said before, it is imperative for you to assume that Jed suffers from the mental illness, it doesn't matter whether it exists or not.

Haha an yehh im in yr12, great funnn isn't, specially turning up every monday with a hangover and trying to focus on the damn physics teacher lol :buck2:

[mickey_b08]

we arn't given it 

HOW CAN U WRITE A RESPONSES TO THAT??? lol

I asked the teacher and she told me to take the voice of either Joe or just a reader. I'm meant to write a letter about how one view of the accident (Jed's) is not sufficient information to print an article, as 'Whatever an individual might think, it is impossible from someone to see the world objectively and without bias.'...