Parry represents the missing child in Clarissa and Joe's relationship' How far does your reading of the novel the support this claim?
'Enduring Love' has many recurring themes that are clear to the reader such as: obsession, love and religion. However, there is always the more subtle expressed theme, absence of children. McEwan explores the gap of the missing child in Joe and Clarissa's relationship throughout the novel and the reader never witnesses closure of this gap until the appendix. One earlier suggestion to closing the gap is by the introduction of Jed Parry; Parry is shown to the reader to have unpredictable, obsessive and immature characteristics, much like a child. Whereas, Joe is shown to be rational, well educated, leading a successful lifestyle, much more like a father figure within a family. McEwan deliberately portrays both these aforementioned roles through their dialogue and the relationship between the two which could be seen as a test for Joe before he is rewarded.
McEwan constantly reminds the reader of the missing child within Joe and Clarissa's relationship. Most central things that happen in the novel are usually determined by children or around children. For instance, the destruction of Joe and Clarissa's relationship would never have happened if Harry, a ten year old boy, was not in the basket. On page thirty one Clarissa tells Joe that Logan was a "good man" because "he had children of his own". This shows the reader Clarissa's desire for children and the hole this leaves in her life. McEwan is deliberately establishing the importance of the child early on in the novel; this is further emphasised when Joe tells the reader about Clarissa's "surgical procedure" and that she is "unable to bear children". By establishing the importance of the child, McEwan also establishes the importance of the gap in their relationship, thus creating a space in the reader's perception of the relationship that needs to be filled.
On the other hand, Parry could be seen as a distraction from the missing child and the reason Joe focuses on Parry is due to his longing for children. "I was playing along with this domestic". By calling it a "domestic drama" Joe is showing the reader that he knows it is not normality and that they are not a partnership, however he still "plays along" with the idea; therefore showing the reader Joe's distraction from his main issues and how he is now focused on Parry. Furthermore, Joe calls their "household" a "turd-strewn pavement". This evokes to the reader Joe knows that Parry is not a child, and that the "turd-strewn" pavement connotes Parry is not fresh and young like a new born and will never be a seen as a child by Joe.
One main reason why Parry could be interpreted as the child to Joe is their age difference. Joe is old enough to be Parry's real dad and in a post modern era where more and more charities are being introduced helping parentless children find their families, there is never the reassurance needed for the reader. McEwan wrote "Enduring Love" whilst living in a dysfunctional society where nothing is ever set in stone and he leaves this issue open within the novel and never brings closure to the reader; thus creating the mysterious, anxious and unsure feeling the reader has on the relationship of Joe and Parry.
In McEwan's other work pieces there is an intriguing focus on his interest in children and factors that mould their upbringing. Within "Enduring Love" the reader hears of Parry's mother "who died from cancer" and how his aunt had a "terrible marriage". This allows the reader to understand Parry's misconception of love, and why he is clingy and obsessive. It shows the reader that he may want to re-live it and try to seek a role model in his life. However, his distorted views of love have enabled him to find this in Joe but not achieve the response he wished for. Furthermore, in chapter eleven the adjective "terrible" connotes his childhood to be a misery and this adds emphasis on Parry's longing for a role model as he has never had one before.
McEwan never portrays Clarissa, Joe and Parry as a family unit, clearly showing the reader that the hole is never filled and that Parry does not represent the missing child. Peter Childs believes that "children serve in this childless novel" as a means to "bring people together". This claim is supported by Harry bringing Parry, Logan and Joe together in the field and also is supported by the Logan children helping Joe and Clarissa realise their mistakes and problems which ends with the two getting back together in chapter twenty four. I agree with Child's perception on the children's role within the novel as I think it eliminates Parry as representing the child because he drives Joe and Clarissa apart. The reader see's Parry as a distraction away from the childless relationship of Joe and Clarissa, we see him add extra stress and pressure on their relationship which results in their separation, thus clearly showing Parry not as a child "bringing people together" but as an obsessive love rival driving people apart.
It is in Chapter seven where the diction choice lends itself particularly to this theory of a father child relationship. The reader see's Joe and Jed have their first developed conversation, and within the conversation we see many echo's of a father, child relationship: "I spoke to him firmly but with a little kindness too". The use of the adverb "firmly" portrays Joe as the more dominant figure in the relationship. On the other hand, I feel the dominance connotes more of a patient, doctor relationship and shows Joe playing the role of problem solver. Furthermore, by saying "kindness" it shows Joe's as not wanting to be to hard on Parry, emphasising he feels empathy towards Parry and that he needs fixing in Joe's eyes.
Overall, although there are many characteristics within the relationship of Joe and Parry that have father and child connotations, it is clear that Parry does not represent the missing child within Clarissa and Joe's relationship. The three are never really seen together and Randal Curb says it "is almost a triangle" emphasising the fact that Parry was never there to fill the gap in Joe and Clarissa's relationship but was brought into their lives as a romantic threat by McEwan to test their relationship and to remind them off their problems. This is evident in the appendix where McEwan lets the reader know that Joe and Clarissa adopted a child, showing them that Parry was only there to make Clarissa and Joe realise they have to solve their problems. In Clarissa's eyes Parry never meant anything to her in the way of a child and she never played the role of mother to Parry. Joe's calm and rational nature earlier on in the novel evokes a sympathetic view to Parry, almost like a father; however, we later see that it is just Joe's personality trait and that the more irrational he became and the more obsessed Parry became, we realise as readers that the "triangle" was never meant as a family unit but as a test on a so called "perfect" relationship portrayed by McEwan.
