theguardian.com
McEwan's "What We Can Know": A Novel of Nostalgia and Liberal Partiality
Ian McEwan's new novel, "What We Can Know," set in 2119, depicts a post-catastrophe Britain reduced to a fragmented archipelago, where a literature professor's obsessive search for a lost poem reveals a nostalgic and potentially unreliable perspective on the early 21st century.
- How does the narrative structure and the inclusion of a lost poem function in conveying the novel's message?
- The novel's structure, composed of two distinct parts linked by a brief note, mirrors the fragmented landscape and isolated perspectives. The search for the lost poem serves as a metaphor for grappling with the past and its relevance to a dramatically altered present, symbolizing the protagonist's struggle to comprehend and confront the moral consequences of climate change.
- What are the broader implications of the novel's critique of liberalism, and what potential future impacts does it suggest?
- McEwan's critique suggests that a narrow, nostalgic liberalism may be ill-equipped to address large-scale global challenges. The novel implies that more inclusive and forward-looking approaches are necessary to confront the moral and physical consequences of climate change and other crises, potentially necessitating a reevaluation of existing political and social structures.
- What is the central theme explored in McEwan's "What We Can Know", and how does the novel's setting contribute to this theme?
- The novel's central theme is the limitations and potential biases of liberal perspectives, particularly concerning the climate crisis. The fragmented, post-catastrophe setting of a reduced Britain emphasizes the insularity and nostalgia of the protagonist's worldview, highlighting the inadequacy of his perspective in facing the profound changes of the 21st century.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The review focuses on the author's perceived Englishness and its limitations, particularly the omission of Ireland's fate in a post-apocalyptic scenario. The framing emphasizes the author's perspective and uses this as a lens to critique the novel's themes. For example, the headline or introduction could have highlighted the novel's exploration of nostalgia and liberal partiality more directly, rather than focusing solely on the author's nationality.
Language Bias
The language used is generally objective but contains some potentially loaded terms. For instance, describing the characters as 'high court judges' and 'neurosurgeons' implies a certain social standing, while terms like "worrying upstarts" carry a negative connotation. The phrase "pesky six counties" reveals a bias. More neutral alternatives would be to refer to the characters by their professions without social implications, and to use the official name of Northern Ireland.
Bias by Omission
The most significant omission is the lack of detail regarding Ireland's fate in the post-apocalyptic scenario, which the reviewer highlights as a reflection of the author's 'Englishness'. This omission could be seen as a form of bias, either unintentional due to the novel's focus or intentional due to a lack of interest in the Irish perspective. The review also points out the lack of focus on the global consequences of climate change, and the focus instead remains on a small group of characters.
False Dichotomy
The review doesn't present a false dichotomy, but it does highlight the novel's own potential tendency towards a simplistic view of the world. For instance, by focusing on the experience of a small group of characters, it may overlook other aspects of the post-apocalyptic world, creating a narrow focus.
Sustainable Development Goals
The novel directly addresses the impacts of climate change, depicting a future where rising sea levels and a catastrophic tsunami reshape the geography of the UK, resulting in a significantly altered landscape. The narrative highlights the devastating consequences of inaction on climate change, illustrating the potential for widespread displacement and societal upheaval. The author uses a fictional scenario to underscore the urgency of climate action and the potentially severe repercussions of failing to mitigate climate change.