Under the Volcano: reflections, questions, and collection of gems

After reading Under the Volcano (so hard!) I went back to the thirty phrases, or sentences, or passages that I have marked as little gems or noteworthy for some reason.

I must say I was quite delighted to re-read those, and I often took note (re-typed to copy and declaimed) a little more than just the excepts that shined at the first reading. So great. The reward, at last!

Would you mind if I share some of those here? I’m afraid it’s a bit long for a post and splitting them into several posts might be too much of a spam. There are also a few questions that arose during the reading and after, once everything settled or with exchanges I had with other readers. I’ll try a bit here and you tell me if it’s appropriate.

Before going into those details, I would like to address this question: reading or not reading Under the Volcano? It’s a conflicting question for me (excuse my ESL, I’ll try to rephrase), because the reading took so long and was such a chore that I wish I knew beforehand what I was delving into. I wouldn’t have read it so close to my previous hard-to-read novel (Dhalgren), so I’d have replenished enough stamina for it (by reading other candidates of my reading pipe).

At the same time I’m glad I collected all those sentences I’m reviewing now, drinking the nectar of the master (we’re lucky to be able to share literature without having less of it, otherwise I would have kept it all for myself!), but the price was quite a hefty one for a few sips.

So, would I recommend reading Under the Volcano? It’s like climbing a mountain: nice view for sure, but not for everyone every time. Get there prepared enough, if you like hiking in a barren land and sustaining prolonged efforts. Take your time, be persistent.

Now, back to the content, with a selection of what I’m after.

Questions sample: (not spoiling too much)

1. All along the reading, I thought we would get back to this gruesome event mentioned at the beginning (the German crew’s fate on the boat), and I was teased by the many clues repeatedly pointing to the themes of the sailing, of the sea, and death, fire, even immolation, and maybe guilt? In the end, nothing conclusive; at the end the focus was more on the relationship with Yvonne. Maybe I was influenced by the wiki page? Does this past event really play a decisive role in the story? Or is it just looming over like that, from far away?
2. Hugh’s journey long flashback looks like a reminiscence of (or a reference to) Ultramarine (that I haven’t read), or maybe is it just the author getting back to his marine experiences. How do you take it?
3. For those who have read it, do you feel the author conveys how the Consul and Yvonne are a good match, why they fell in love or what makes the Consul attractive to Yvonne? A redditor recently commented on the matter (‘not buying it’) and as I looked back, yes, it is something that crossed my mind, but I didn’t pay too much attention that we readers aren't given a good understanding of what makes them stick together, to start with. (sorry for my poor wording)

And lastly, a few quotes, a couple of the shortest ones (keeping the very best for another time):

[about the Consul who is 12yo older than Hugh:]

Yet it was as though fate had fixed his age at some unidentifiable moment in the past, when his persistent objective self, perhaps weary of standing askance and watching his downfall, had at last withdrawn from him altogether, like a ship secretly leaving harbour at night.

And this other one for which I have a question:

The Consul at first had ordered only shrimps and a hamburger sandwich but yielded to Yvonne’s : ‘Darling, won’t you eat more than that, I could eat a youn’ horse,’ and their hands met across the table.

And then, for the second time that day, their eyes, in a long look, a long look of longing. Behind her eyes, beyond her, the Consul, an instant, saw Granada, and the train waltzing from Algeciras over the plains of Andalusia, chuflerty pupperty, [long rambling]

Here the author starts the second paragraph with a sentence that has no verb, so my guess is that it’s the same as the previous sentence: to meet. Their eyes meet. It’s implied. Okay. But my point is that there is a new line in the middle of something that goes together. And this kind of splitting happens all the time. The new paragraph is starting right in the middle of some logical unit, while the transitions between units are within paragraphs. Do you have any insights regarding this choice of his? Actually this example might not be the best for that question, but I like it a lot: It’s an amazing, excruciating moment where the Consul drifts away again. Away from love.

I need to stop, sorry for the length.

Usual disclaimer: I’m an amateur, not English native, not trying to look like something. Not written with A. I.