The Wake (And What Jeremiah Did Next) Page 14
But old fears die hard and this is going to take me awhile. In the meantime I say to myself that life without Aisling would be a worse hell than anything the devil could serve up. And if there’s such a thing as heaven on earth then this is it. Happy daze.
Afterword
About two weeks after the first edition of The Wake (and What Jeremiah Did Next) was published a very good friend called me on the phone and said “Colm, why didn’t you just tell it the way it was? I was there for most of it and you’ve played about with the truth.” When I protested that I had more or less told the truth he persisted. “The best writing is supposed to be about truth,” he told me. “Not more, not less, but the exact truth.”
I felt like doing a Pontius Pilate on him and saying “What is truth?” but that wouldn’t have been fair. So instead I quoted the philosopher Francis Bacon (without mentioning his name of course) and said “You know what I think? Truth is so hard to tell, it sometimes needs fiction to make it plausible.” There was a pause before he replied “OK. Maybe there’s something in that.”
More than something. Everything that’s important in writing fiction is there in Bacon’s words. Non-fiction tries to use fact to help us see the lies. Fiction uses metaphor to help us see the truth.
One more quote before I go. In an essay titled Witness: the Inward testimony the great South African author Nadine Gordimer wrote in reference to the tragic events of 11 September 2001: “Terror pounced from the sky and the world made witness to it.” She contemplated the media coverage of the felling of the twin towers, the difference between the reporter’s job, the pundit’s job and that of the writer. She continued: “Meaning is what cannot be reached by the immediacy of the image, the description of the sequence of events, the methodologies of expert analysis. The writer sees among the ruins different (and more) things than others. (S)he sees what is really taking place.” I, Colm Herron, have tried hard to see.
I suppose I should end by reiterating what I wrote in my introduction: namely, that I am Jeremiah and all of the other characters in the book are real people. I may have taken liberties with one or two of them and for that I ask their forgiveness. My only defence is that truth sometimes needs fiction to make it plausible.
The Wake (And What Jeremiah Did Next)
Discussion Questions
Did the Author’s Introduction help you understand the political background of the novel?
How did the author’s use of dialect and Irish slang affect your reading of The Wake?
Were you able to relate to any, some, or all of the characters in Herron’s novel?
What did you think of the atmosphere: In the wake house?
During the times that Jeremiah was watching television with his mother?
In the City Hotel and later in Aisling’s apartment?
On the four-day march?
What is your opinion of the writer’s portrayal of Catholic clergy and religion in the novel?
How did the author’s use of farce in the bathroom and ménage à trois scenes strike you?
If you could ask the author one question, what would you ask and why?
Has The Wake changed or broadened your perspective in any way? Why or why not?
How does the setting of the first half of the book affect your reading of the second half?
How does Jeremiah’s character (and your perception of him) unfold over the course of the book? Can you relate to Jeremiah in any way?
Why did the author choose to begin the book at a wake?
How does the book make you feel? Is there anything in it that makes you uncomfortable, touches a nerve or makes you laugh? Why?
The novel is concerned with different types of freedom. What would you say they are and which one of them would you consider the most important?