I would like to discuss the irony that I have found behind the novel. “The ordinary medical man dismisses them from his attention with the cut - and - dried remark that they are "only the effects of the imagination".”(Hopkins, 3) This passage holds significance not only to the plot of the novel, but to something a little bit deeper. It reflects the imagination the author has as well, in her use of descriptive language and imagery. I found this to be rather ironic.
For example; when the author describes Reuel, she is very descriptive and gives a significant display of imagery, “No one could fail to notice the vast breadth of shoulder, the strong throat that upheld a plain face, the long limbs, the sinewy hands.” (Hopkins, 3) then the author goes on to keep describing Reuel, giving the reader an actual picture perfect image of the character. The author also does this with other characters and with the setting, for example; “Proceeding along a mountain gorge, our travelers found the path straitened between the impending mountain on one side and a rapid and sparkling stream on the other.” Again, the author goes on to further describe the setting, leaving nothing to the imagination of the reader. In each character, setting and situation we are given enough detail to create an entire picture of the novel in our minds.
I found this to be ironic because the author creates a character that is known to have an overwhelming imagination, when she herself has one. It makes me wonder sometimes if authors purposely create their characters to reflect themselves regardless of gender, race or ethnicity. After reading Maggie, A Girl Of The Streets by Crane (which I loved), it's actually very refreshing to read a novel that already supplies so much information. In Maggie, we are left to interpret much of what goes on, we are left to interpret characters, situations and even settings at some points, but with this novel, we are already given a very descriptive amount of imagery and information.
