Originally Posted by Karen 14th February 2006


What is your definition of our leading character in this black comedy, Sebastian Dangerfield?

Did you see him perhaps as an anarchist or a hypocrite or just a ruthless person? Something entirely different?

Lynxxx67


I see him principly as a bit of a dirty rotten scoundrel. A manipulator. We see him manipulate people into thinking he is something he isn't. Like when he goes to the store, looking and sounding like some well-to-do 'Etonian' sort and charming his way into getting instant credit. He has the 'gift of the gab' and he knows just how to use it to his advantage!

Karen


That's a great start, he is indeed a scoundrel. And SD is so many more things. What other character descriptions are there for him? I think he's a bit of several different kinds...I think there's a part anarchist in there some where because what he does sort of flies in the face the social "attitudes" of the time. He does what he wants, no matter how it affects people..

Sddeb


I see a bit of fear in him as well...as if he knows he shouldn't be doing some of these things but something has hold of him and he can't stop...a bit like Rochester, as previously alluded to. He tries hard to make ammends with Marion, although it IS for his own selfishness and just when it seems he might be on the right track all goes awry again due to his me, me, me lazy scoundrel attitude.

Lynxxx67

Very true, in the sense that he goes about his business in the least honest manner. He's a sponger and a lazy lout, like sddeb said in her post. He could easily get some sort of job to pay his way, instead of 'robbing Peter to pay Paul', as we Brits like to say! But he claims his time is taken up with study, though we never hold witness to any such thing!

And yet he harbours such dreams of contentment; plenty of money, a good woman and a comfortable existance. Is it the sheer desire for some kind of, prehaps, unattainable 'utopia' that makes him act like such a rotter? Does he even deserve to find it? Or even more importantly, will it make him happy if he did??

Giselle


oh gosh, how i've wanted to use this word since POTC....

mis·cre·ant ( P ) Pronunciation Key (mskr-nt)
n.
An evildoer; a villain.
An infidel; a heretic.

by the way - before i forget i thought of another anti-hero played by johnny - hunter thompson! probably the quintessential anti-hero....

anyway - maybe dangerfield is part miscreant. i don't believe he's evil - but he can definitely be a villian - ask his wife and string of women. most of the time i didn't like him. he could be very funny at times but i didn't sense, for example, the rapier wit of the earl or the coolness of corso.

i saw a very aimless man who couldn't seem to find his place. probably related to his paternal/family issues - but i won't get psychoanalytical because i don't think that was mr. donleavy's point. to me, stream of consciousness writing is the most difficult to understand what it is the writer wants you to feel - or does he want you to feel anything or to just go along for the ride? probably a question i'd like to ask mr. donleavy.

Lynxxx67

That IS a good one. That is sometimes how it felt to read, occasions where it appeared that his (SD or JPD?) thoughts would spring onto the page in rapid succession. Then other times where the pace was more thoughtful, if that makes sense. Just wanted to chip in with that!

Karen


GOOD questions! Are y'all writing them down for Mr. Donleavy?

Miscreant is one of my fav words....

I think that Sebastian has learned or seen that perhaps working for things is useless for him....hence his lack of studying. But I wonder why he can't or won't cherish his family?

Lynxxx67

Though I don't immediately recall reading anything that might stem back to his own upbringing, on the face of it, he seems to treat his wife and baby as an inconvenience and their demands on him like a cross he refuses to carry. But as to why he can't or won't bond with his own flesh and blood, I've no idea.

Deppraved


By no means as lofty a word, but a common vernacular modern one that leaps to mind: user. Despicable!

Banana


At times I had the impression that it's all a big game to him -- playing the court jester, seeing how much he can get away with. It would probably be alot easier if he just gave in and studied or actually got a job, but oh no, that would violate the rules of the game! I have to give him credit for working really hard at being completely irresponsible!

Shadowdog


I see him as self-centered, slightly amoral and as a man who has little or no empathy for those around him. They are there to be used to fulfill his own needs and desires. In short, I'm araid I don't much care for him as a person.

SROBERTS101A


I think he's all those things - an anarchist, hypocrite, user, etc. - as well as lazy, selfish, self destructive, and self loathing. For me, it was hard to like him as a character, although he was very funny at times. I guess that's because he's an anti-hero. Beyond not wanting to work for anything, he seems to loath himself on some deep level as though he genuinely doesn't think he's worthy of having anything of substance (family, home, career, education, etc.) He just does what he has to do to survive. He has opportunities to turn things around, but he constantly sabotages himself. It's all about him and how things affect him, yet ironically, despite his selfish motives and everything he does to "help" himself, he always destroys what he has. Does that make any sense?

Karen


Yes, that makes perfect sense, but then I tend to see this as a bit of a satire, so that "fits the bill" for me.

We don't have to like him and it'll be really interesting to see what Johnny does with SD.

Shadowdog


I have been pondering this throughout the book. JPD wrote this in a "different universe" than the one that exists today for those of us who are reading it. This would have (I think) have been perceived (by male readers) as a great romp by a great bloke so to speak. I doubt if many females in the 50's would have read it. In today's world it would be perceived very differently by both males and females???

If Mr. Donleavy were to write this book today, how much different would Sebastian, Marion, Mary, etc be from the characters created in the story??? Or would they be different??

Karen

Interesting questions!!

SROBERTS101A


I never thought about that! I think that's a very astute observation. I'm looking at his adventures in a very different light from the vantage point of 2006 compared to the era in which the book was written and my reaction to it is obviously colored by my personal experiences in a very different timeframe and cultural climate than existed then. I'm sure you're right that more men would have read this than women in that era.

Karen


I think that may even be somewhat true today, we are reading it because of the Johnny connection. While I had heard about it and we even have a Ginger Man bar in town, I never bothered to actually read the book.

Lynxxx67


I'd never heard about it either. I'd personally like to thank JD, and 'the powers that be' for purchasing the rights, in bringing all these excellent reads to our attention. Until just recently, I hadn't picked up a decent intelligent book in years, lol! Now I've seriously got the bug!

Karen


I've always been a reader, but Johnny sure has widened my literary horizons! LOL

Oh and just so we don't confuse anyone, JD and IN don't own the rights to The Ginger Man, Mr. Donleavy retains those film rights. But to so many others we have read or discussed........yes he and/or IN own the film rights.