24 April 2012:
Never before has a book made me think so deeply.
I know I have recommended this book before in previous posts, but this book really, really calls for deep thought. The front part (Chapter One) may seem to be like a boring, mundane recount of an old man's teenage years, but it's actually for subsequent revelations in Chapter Two. (There's only two chapters.)
This book deals with history and memories. About how sometimes history is distorted (unintentionally) due to various reasons, and how all these distortions twist into a tragic set of events.
I read a book review about this book last time, and the reviewer remarked that every word has a meaning in this novel. Maybe it's not exactly so, but almost every phrase or sentence does indeed carry a meaning, mostly hidden ones.
The book is called The Sense of an Ending. What is the 'ending'? Does it simply refer to the end of the story? Or the end of the state of affairs in the book? Was the state of affairs even ended by the end of the story?
That is only the tip of the iceberg for stuff to consider about. I personally think this is a better text for Literature than Clay Marble (no offence to Minfong Ho). But of course, with sexual references inside, it's obviously impossible to be studied in secondary schools.
Back to how the book deals with history. History, contrary to most people's thinking, is not something that is dead and cast in stone. History can be changed. Sometimes it is changed for the better - to reveal previously hidden perspectives of the issue; sometimes it is changed for the worse - to mask blemishes in particular people's profiles. (Hint, China Communist Party and how they changed their history curriculum.)
Nevertheless, history is rather alive. But is history reliable? So what if textbooks say so? They received their information from other sources. Even primary sources may not be reliable. What if all primary sources were lying? The information that is inaccurate would simply be taken to be true.
History is the certainty produced at the point where imperfections of memory meet the inadequacies of documentation.
What you end up remembering isn't always the same as what you have witnessed.
History is the lies of the victors, and the self-delusions of the defeated.
But finally,
History ... it's more the memories of the survivors, most of whom are neither victorious nor defeated.