A Trying to meet all your book preview and review needs.
to e-mail us: support the site |
Accident general information | review summaries | our review | links | about the author
- Return to top of the page -
Our Assessment:
A- : captures the personal (doubts, in particular) very well See our review for fuller assessment.
From the Reviews: - Return to top of the page - The complete review's Review:
Accident begins with the fatal car crash at the heart of the book.
Narrator Stephen Jervis, a fellow at Oxford, teaching philosophy, is not involved, but two of his students are, William and Anna, and they were on their way to see him.
Stephen comes across the scene, finding an intoxicated Anna who had apparently been behind the wheel (unlicensed), and dead William; he takes Anna to his house and calls the police -- but isn't then entirely forthcoming about the scene as he found it.
The impression the police are left with is that William was driving, and alone.
A long way away. I am doing this two years after. Looking back on it.There's an awareness of (fictional) arrangement in the narrative as well, from how philosopher Stephen grapples with his many issues to the occasional more direct acknowledgement of what he is doing, or trying to, as when he recounts: "I remember one Sunday about this time (what is a story ? a sequence ? a meaning ?) when I went with my wife Rosalind and the children [...]". And in the closing passage comes the surprise that this very personal account is apparently not, directly, Stephen's at all: "Charlie is the writer: he will write this book" -- suggesting, too, that the connection between the two men is closer even than one might have gathered from the account itself. (A nice aside, long before readers are made aware of who is actually doing the writing, has Stephen noting: "I do not know how to write about Charlie".) Of similar age -- Stephen is forty -- and both with wives and children, they and their actions suggest the two main alternatives as far as life choices go, with Stephen the dutiful don, tempted by Anna but ultimately true to his wife, while besotted Charlie -- always a more free spirit -- abandons his family and has a passionate affair. Stephen seems to be suffering from a midlife crisis even before Anna becomes his student. He's used to domestic life, but worn by it. The passion has drained from his marriage; he is devoted to Rosalind and the children but misses what once was. It is also a matter of the current age -- the 1960s --, and the (new) generation: one of his issues is that he see how separate he is from these. Now he sees himself mostly as tired and cautious, in ever-unchanging Oxford, with even his academic work dominated by committee meetings and the like rather than thought. There's real nostalgia to his feelings, too: Rosalind was a soft flame in this hard world. Something so strong, beautiful. A pain in my heart at so much beauty. My hand shakes as I write this. There is so much sorrow, death. I adored Rosalind. The dream is more real. The perfect flower.He is close to both William and Anna, but there is that separation of generations (and of personal ties and duties: he is weighed down by his family; they are unencumbered). An early lesson Stephen has with Anna touches upon attitudes towards the idea of existence, Stephen differentiating his from her generation's: I said "Once it was all dreams, any old nonsense. We were obsessed by this. Now we know. And it's a good thing we do, because now it would be too dangerous. It's reason, at least, that keeps the world going."The question of personal responsibility (and duties) is a major one in the novel, and despite what he says, Stephen clearly is torn -- and clearly jealous of Charlie's irresponsible behavior. But he's grounded, in a way that Anna's nuclear-holocaust-fearing generation is not, and he recognizes how much of a chasm that makes for between these generations. Stephen's wife was pregnant with their third child at this time, and it was a difficult pregnancy -- conveniently also taking her to her parents' house, leaving the family home empty. She gives birth prematurely, and for quite some time the infant hangs between life and death. Mosley times the birth to coïncide with William's death -- but doesn't immediately make clear whether death will indeed be balanced out by new life. Only when matters are resolved is there indeed affirmation in/through new life. Accident is a deeply introspective work. Stephen notes early on already that: "We analyse ourselves too much; we know all this", but Mosley handles Stephen's soul-searching exceptionally well. There's a drift to many of the thoughts -- and especially memories -- but without ever becoming too obscure; Stephen's world may be all turmoil, but there's also a plodding certainty to his steps and thoughts as he navigates his issues. Even at his (and the narrative's) loosest, there is structure and progression: This is a story about free will. We are all in fragment, disjointed. We have moments when it means something. I know nothing of Anna. We have a choice. The familiar things of my room, books, alarm clock, tumbler. Rosalind's coat. Her dressmaking dummy in the corner. I am half a person. A millionth. We think too much: stare at it.The story is framed as that of a moral dilemma -- whether or not to tell the truth about the accident, a consequence of which would likely be the ruining of Anna's life -- and, as Stephen says when he and Charlie, who becomes his co-equal/conspirator in the aftermath of the accident: "This is too difficult. Morals are too difficult". Ultimately, they allow the matter to resolve itself essentially through inaction -- a path of least resistance that seems to be agreeable to everyone, from William's mourning parents to the Oxford authorities. This too drains Stephen -- indeed, despite the two-year distance he allowed himself (and/or Charlie) before turning back to these events, the account is suffused with the weight of this moral (in)decision. Stephen is often tired in his account, but then he's generally world-weary: his marriage is the most obvious manifestation of this, but it's all of a piece. When he eventually states: "We can none of us feel anything any more" it reads as though there's almost wishful thinking to it. Accident is nominally about a moral dilemma, and that is an important part of the novel, but where it really impresses is in its portrayal of everyday family life, perfectly, exhaustedly captured through Stephen. Beyond that, it is also a fine portrait of academic and specifically Oxford life, neatly portraying also Anna and William's generation, and class (yet another factor in the story, with Charlie of working class background, and Stephen keenly aware of William and Anna's upper class backgrounds). Mosley's style of introspection impresses, too, and though in some ways rooted in the 1960s -- both in its story and in the writing -- Accident holds up very well even half a century later. - M.A.Orthofer, 18 December 2019 - Return to top of the page - Accident:
- Return to top of the page - British author Nicholas Mosley lived 1923 to 2017. - Return to top of the page -
© 2019-2021 the complete review
|