The Gleaners of West Gull

In part 1, the story reads like a run on sentence – a runaway train of thought full of pity and regret. I wonder how Carl will ever dig himself out of this hole. It’s funny that Carl buried Ned in a hole up to his neck, because it seems like everyone in this story is up to his neck in regret. It’s so depressing, I wish I could get a shovel and dig them all out!

In part 2, the writing becomes more formal. We are now hearing the story from a place that is further removed from the characters. Whereas in part 1 I felt a strong affinity towards Carl and his situation, now I just see myself as a spectator off in the distance, uninvolved with any of the characters or events being described. However, despite this distance, I am finding the story of Elizabeth (Carl’s mother) and Adam (her lover) to be much more interesting and involved than the puppy love turned to obsession story of Carl and Chrissy. There is more drama, more intrigue, and the author does a better job of creating some mystery and suspense. What is going to happen between these two? Where is this story leading us? Could there be more than what meets the eye to this relationship between these outwardly bookish couple? The story is suddenly less familiar and yet somehow more real.




I am finding more and more that Cohen's story telling is reminiscent of French realist painting – the spectator is far removed from the people in the scene, and the scene itself is very close to the viewer's everyday experiences. It’s building the same sense of understanding and empathy that the great painters such as Jean Francois Millet mastered. When Millet started painting everyday subjects such as gleaners (people who would harvest the scraps from the wheat field in order to survive), the art world was shocked that a painter would give such consideration to a lowly peasant. Until this time, all large scale works of art were dedicated solely to the genres of history painting, royalty, and battle scenes. When Millet unveiled his painting, the Gleaners in 1857, he brought attention to the underbelly of French society. Millet focused on poverty, a subject matter that was based on real life for the majority of the French population – something familiar. With this work of art, the genre of French Realism was born and there was a momentous shift amongst painters to focus on the common everyday aspects of life.

Today, the boundaries of art and literature are almost endless. However, while reading Elizabeth and After I still find myself thinking of Millet and his Gleaners. Cohen has brought to life the everyday mundane and yet dramatic aspects of a small town. I am sure that there are characters like Carl and Chrissy and Elizabeth and Adam in small towns scattered throughout Southwestern Ontario. The people and events are not overly spectacular or uncommon, but real and familiar.