Why We Love to Read What We Love to Read
I fell in love with the work of Emily Giffin in her first novel, Something Borrowed. I was empathetic for the main character and her situation. I was biting my nails in anticipation of the ending. I loved the story so much that I have read it over and over again. It took many readings for a thought to dawn on me: how could I be so connected to a character and involved in a story that focused on having an affair in a relationship? I consider myself to be someone who strives for high morals; at the very least, I (and I’m sure most other readers) would never advocate cheating and having affairs in my personal life. Yet Something Borrowed is a New York Times bestseller. There must be a rhyme or reason to the public enjoyment of this novel, despite its controversial topic.
There are many tools that writers can use when creating a story to engage their audience: relatable characters, interesting twists and turns in the plot, and the list goes on. When a writer wants to tell a story involving a controversial topic, she must use her tools carefully so as not to alienate her audience.
In his article “A Rhetoric of Reading,” James Seitz argues that the best kind of writing is one where the writer anticipates the writing being read. He says that the reader heavily participates in the rhetoric of the reading by making connections within the text and bringing their own stances and cultural paradigms into the experience. There is a relationship that goes on between the reader and the writer. Therefore, Seitz believes the writer must anticipate both the needs of the reader and the possible projections the writer might have when reading about a certain topic in order to make the writing truly good.
In Something Borrowed, narrator Rachel White sleeps with her best friend’s fiancée, Dex Thaler, after having one too many drinks on her thirtieth birthday. Being the do-gooder type, Rachel is horrified to find she has made such a huge mistake in her lifelong friendship with Darcy Rhone. She and Dex decide to keep it to themselves, but as Darcy and Dex’s wedding nears, Rachel and Dex find themselves drawn to each other in a romantic way, bolstered by their pre-Darcy friendship; it was Rachel who had introduced the two after she befriended Dex in law school. Regret over unspoken feelings propels Rachel and Dex’s affair into something that Rachel has always wanted but never let herself find until now – true love.
The opening chapter introduces Rachel and the main characters in the story: Darcy, her best friend, and Dex, Darcy’s fiancée. By the beginning of chapter two, Rachel and Dex have had a one-night stand. By now, the reader has most likely already brought in some of her own cultural paradigms about being a goody two shoes (Rachel), being a sexy yet shallow life of the party (Darcy) and being a good-looking all around good guy (Dex). These are the personalities that the text has brought about. While some readers may have already chosen a side in the Rachel vs. Darcy issue, it is safe to say that more needs to be known about their individual personalities and their history of friendship. Not only this, but infidelity is a controversial topic that most readers will already have a stance on prior to reading the text.
Although the narrator does not endorse infidelity outright, I can assume that the author, Giffin, does not want the reader to see Rachel in a negative light. Giffin must anticipate a negative response, so something must happen in the text to soften the blow of infidelity that Rachel has taken part in. In the second half of the second chapter, Rachel, the narrator, addresses the reader in a very particular way. She is thinking to herself about what is right and wrong about her actions and about her friendship with Darcy. Suddenly, she employs a specific thought process: she acts as though she is on trial and defending her case to jurors. (Rachel is a lawyer.) She states her first defense, a story from childhood in which Darcy stole Rachel’s middle school crush from her. After sharing the details of the story directly to the reader, Rachel then addresses the imaginary jury: “So, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, in a sense, Darcy Rhone had this coming to her. What goes around comes around. Perhaps this is her comeuppance.” (Giffin 25)
Rachel then describes to the reader her vision of the jury after she spoke to them. “I picture the faces of the jury. They are not swayed. The male jurors look bewildered – as if they miss the point altogether. Doesn’t the prettiest girl always get the boy? That is precisely the way the world should work.” (Giffin 26) By addressing this jury, Rachel is indirectly treating the reader as a member of the jury. She is not pleading her case directly to the reader, which may lead to the reader distrusting her because she is pushing so hard. She is pleading her case to imaginary jurors in hopes that the reader may also be swayed. She specifically points out reactions from male jurors and a prim woman whom Rachel says has “already identified and allied herself with Darcy.” (Giffin 26) These are a few of the types of readers who may be reading this novel and therefore may need to be addressed in one way or another on this issue.
Rachel presents just one juror who may side with Rachel and her actions. “The only juror who seems to be moved by the Ethan tale is a slightly overweight girl with a severe bob the color of day old coffee. She slouches in the corner of the jury box, occasionally shoving her glasses up on her beak of a nose. I have tapped into this girl’s empathy, her sense of justice. She is secretly satisfied by what I did. Maybe because she, too, has a friend like Darcy, a friend who always gets everything she wants.” (Giffin 26) Rachel introduces her ally last, and makes certain that the audience knows that out of twelve jurors, there is only one person who may side with Rachel. The reason for this connects with the reasoning above: she cannot risk loosing the trust of the reader by pleading her case too hard. However, she does need to gain support somehow, or else no reader will want to continue the novel.
It would take a capable reader to see this tactic that the author is using. (Seitz 146) The reader must be able to see the narrator (Rachel) addressing the audience (the jury) and be able to make connections between them without being directly involved in the communication. The ideal reader of the novel will not notice what may be the narrator’s subtle endorsement of having an affair under special circumstances. She will be on Rachel’s side throughout the story, and cheer for Rachel in the end when she ends up with Dex.
A capable reader may pick up on what the author is doing, as well as the undercurrent of competition between Rachel and Darcy that is mentioned but not focused on. This view also allows the reader to take inferential walks among the text – that is, when the reader steps outside of the text and makes guesses and predictions about what might happen next. The reader can use Rachel’s defense of her own actions and some explanation of her and Darcy’s history, along with previous personal stances, to make educated guesses at what could happen next and how the story might end.
This tactic seems to be successful, judging by the popularity of the novel. However it does not seem to be the only one that Giffin is employing. Rachel may have presented a believable case for herself, but how are we as readers supposed to know we can trust her in the first place? Giffin must establish ethos for Rachel’s character. Ethos, according to Jack Selzer in his “Rhetorical Analysis: Understanding How Texts Persuade Readers,” states that ethos involves the credibility of the rhetor, who in this case is Rachel. Ethos can be established by education, intelligence and/or mannerisms. (Selzer 287) Ethos is important in Something Borrowed because a reader is more likely to trust Rachel if she believes that Rachel is a knowledgeable and a decent person.
As a lawyer, Rachel has already been established as an intelligent, logical person. The reader can assume that Rachel is a reliable narrator. The situation Rachel is in is an emotional one, though, not a logical one. A different kind of ethos needs to be established for the reader to continue to support Rachel and see her point of view in this controversial topic. In chapter eight of the novel, Rachel has a conversation with her friend Ethan, who has known both her and Darcy since childhood. She confides in him her feelings for Dex, which have grown, and the seriousness of their continuing affair.
After spilling the beans, Rachel narrates to the reader: “I’m relieved that he is not preachy and serious. That’s not Ethan’s style, but you never know when someone is going to take the moral high ground. And there is definitely moral high ground all around here, particularly considering that Darcy is a friend of his too. Not as close as he and I are, but they still talk occasionally.” (Giffin 92-93) Not only is Giffin using this part to subtly acknowledge that she is aware that her readers could still change their minds about supporting Rachel, but Giffin is also showing the readers that Rachel knows that what she is doing is wrong.
Further into their conversation, Ethan tells Rachel that he is somewhat amused by the poetic justice of the situation. Rachel is surprised to hear Ethan speak of a life-long competition between her and Darcy. Ethan brings up a story from high school in which Darcy lied about her SAT score to beat Rachel’s, and then later used this lie to justify why she got accepted into Notre Dame (Rachel’s first choice school) and Rachel did not; Darcy’s acceptance into Notre Dame turned out to be another lie. Rachel remembers, “I didn’t care that she lied per se. She was a known embellisher. But the fact that she lied about her score to beat me by five – that part really figured. We didn’t call her on it. There was no point.” (Giffin 95)
In present time, Rachel adds, “I’m glad that Ethan refreshed my memory about Notre Dame…Yes, Darcy could be a good friend – she usually was – but she also screwed me at a few pivotal moments in life: first love, college dreams. Those were no small matters.” (Giffin 97) Giffin uses the deterioration of Darcy’s character to provide ethos for Rachel. While a reader may still not agree with infidelity, she is now being turned against Darcy with purpose – the purpose of indentifying with and supporting Rachel.
Of course, there will always be readers who will not be swayed by Giffin’s techniques. Seitz says that readers can be submissive or resistant to a text. (Seitz 150) When the reader is submissive to the text, she gets caught up in the romance between Rachel and Dex and roots for them to be together, because that is primary goal of the author. When the reader is being resistant to the text, she may side with Darcy, or at the very least deem infidelity wrong on any account, regardless of the circumstances or the methods Giffin has enlisted above. From this perspective, a reader may not feel a push to cheer for Rachel and Dex and may hope for or see a different kind of ending coming.
When the reader can flip back and forth between these two perspectives, she can gain a well-rounded sense of what the author wanted them to feel and what kinds of ending the book may have. Being a capable reader and even a resistant reader does not have to ruin the story. It allows readers such as myself to see exactly how the author has captivated me, despite my projections about morality and infidelity. Not only can I appreciate how Giffin has crafted the novel, but I can switch back to being a submissive reader and be swept along in the story. To this day, I still bite my nails in anticipation of the ending, even though I know what’s coming.
Works Cited
Giffin, Emily. Something Borrowed. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2005. Print.
Seitz, James. "A Rhetoric of Reading." From Rebirth of Rhetoric: Essays in Language, Culture & Education. Ed. Richard Andrews. Place of Publication: Routledge, 1992. 141-155. Print.
Selzer, Jack. “Rhetorical Analysis: Understanding How Texts Persuade Readers.” What Writing Does: An Introduction to Analyzing Texts and Textual Practices. Ed. Charles Bazerman and Paul Prior. Place of Publication: Routledge, 2003. 279-308. Print.
I fell in love with the work of Emily Giffin in her first novel, Something Borrowed. I was empathetic for the main character and her situation. I was biting my nails in anticipation of the ending. I loved the story so much that I have read it over and over again. It took many readings for a thought to dawn on me: how could I be so connected to a character and involved in a story that focused on having an affair in a relationship? I consider myself to be someone who strives for high morals; at the very least, I (and I’m sure most other readers) would never advocate cheating and having affairs in my personal life. Yet Something Borrowed is a New York Times bestseller. There must be a rhyme or reason to the public enjoyment of this novel, despite its controversial topic.
There are many tools that writers can use when creating a story to engage their audience: relatable characters, interesting twists and turns in the plot, and the list goes on. When a writer wants to tell a story involving a controversial topic, she must use her tools carefully so as not to alienate her audience.
In his article “A Rhetoric of Reading,” James Seitz argues that the best kind of writing is one where the writer anticipates the writing being read. He says that the reader heavily participates in the rhetoric of the reading by making connections within the text and bringing their own stances and cultural paradigms into the experience. There is a relationship that goes on between the reader and the writer. Therefore, Seitz believes the writer must anticipate both the needs of the reader and the possible projections the writer might have when reading about a certain topic in order to make the writing truly good.
In Something Borrowed, narrator Rachel White sleeps with her best friend’s fiancée, Dex Thaler, after having one too many drinks on her thirtieth birthday. Being the do-gooder type, Rachel is horrified to find she has made such a huge mistake in her lifelong friendship with Darcy Rhone. She and Dex decide to keep it to themselves, but as Darcy and Dex’s wedding nears, Rachel and Dex find themselves drawn to each other in a romantic way, bolstered by their pre-Darcy friendship; it was Rachel who had introduced the two after she befriended Dex in law school. Regret over unspoken feelings propels Rachel and Dex’s affair into something that Rachel has always wanted but never let herself find until now – true love.
The opening chapter introduces Rachel and the main characters in the story: Darcy, her best friend, and Dex, Darcy’s fiancée. By the beginning of chapter two, Rachel and Dex have had a one-night stand. By now, the reader has most likely already brought in some of her own cultural paradigms about being a goody two shoes (Rachel), being a sexy yet shallow life of the party (Darcy) and being a good-looking all around good guy (Dex). These are the personalities that the text has brought about. While some readers may have already chosen a side in the Rachel vs. Darcy issue, it is safe to say that more needs to be known about their individual personalities and their history of friendship. Not only this, but infidelity is a controversial topic that most readers will already have a stance on prior to reading the text.
Although the narrator does not endorse infidelity outright, I can assume that the author, Giffin, does not want the reader to see Rachel in a negative light. Giffin must anticipate a negative response, so something must happen in the text to soften the blow of infidelity that Rachel has taken part in. In the second half of the second chapter, Rachel, the narrator, addresses the reader in a very particular way. She is thinking to herself about what is right and wrong about her actions and about her friendship with Darcy. Suddenly, she employs a specific thought process: she acts as though she is on trial and defending her case to jurors. (Rachel is a lawyer.) She states her first defense, a story from childhood in which Darcy stole Rachel’s middle school crush from her. After sharing the details of the story directly to the reader, Rachel then addresses the imaginary jury: “So, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, in a sense, Darcy Rhone had this coming to her. What goes around comes around. Perhaps this is her comeuppance.” (Giffin 25)
Rachel then describes to the reader her vision of the jury after she spoke to them. “I picture the faces of the jury. They are not swayed. The male jurors look bewildered – as if they miss the point altogether. Doesn’t the prettiest girl always get the boy? That is precisely the way the world should work.” (Giffin 26) By addressing this jury, Rachel is indirectly treating the reader as a member of the jury. She is not pleading her case directly to the reader, which may lead to the reader distrusting her because she is pushing so hard. She is pleading her case to imaginary jurors in hopes that the reader may also be swayed. She specifically points out reactions from male jurors and a prim woman whom Rachel says has “already identified and allied herself with Darcy.” (Giffin 26) These are a few of the types of readers who may be reading this novel and therefore may need to be addressed in one way or another on this issue.
Rachel presents just one juror who may side with Rachel and her actions. “The only juror who seems to be moved by the Ethan tale is a slightly overweight girl with a severe bob the color of day old coffee. She slouches in the corner of the jury box, occasionally shoving her glasses up on her beak of a nose. I have tapped into this girl’s empathy, her sense of justice. She is secretly satisfied by what I did. Maybe because she, too, has a friend like Darcy, a friend who always gets everything she wants.” (Giffin 26) Rachel introduces her ally last, and makes certain that the audience knows that out of twelve jurors, there is only one person who may side with Rachel. The reason for this connects with the reasoning above: she cannot risk loosing the trust of the reader by pleading her case too hard. However, she does need to gain support somehow, or else no reader will want to continue the novel.
It would take a capable reader to see this tactic that the author is using. (Seitz 146) The reader must be able to see the narrator (Rachel) addressing the audience (the jury) and be able to make connections between them without being directly involved in the communication. The ideal reader of the novel will not notice what may be the narrator’s subtle endorsement of having an affair under special circumstances. She will be on Rachel’s side throughout the story, and cheer for Rachel in the end when she ends up with Dex.
A capable reader may pick up on what the author is doing, as well as the undercurrent of competition between Rachel and Darcy that is mentioned but not focused on. This view also allows the reader to take inferential walks among the text – that is, when the reader steps outside of the text and makes guesses and predictions about what might happen next. The reader can use Rachel’s defense of her own actions and some explanation of her and Darcy’s history, along with previous personal stances, to make educated guesses at what could happen next and how the story might end.
This tactic seems to be successful, judging by the popularity of the novel. However it does not seem to be the only one that Giffin is employing. Rachel may have presented a believable case for herself, but how are we as readers supposed to know we can trust her in the first place? Giffin must establish ethos for Rachel’s character. Ethos, according to Jack Selzer in his “Rhetorical Analysis: Understanding How Texts Persuade Readers,” states that ethos involves the credibility of the rhetor, who in this case is Rachel. Ethos can be established by education, intelligence and/or mannerisms. (Selzer 287) Ethos is important in Something Borrowed because a reader is more likely to trust Rachel if she believes that Rachel is a knowledgeable and a decent person.
As a lawyer, Rachel has already been established as an intelligent, logical person. The reader can assume that Rachel is a reliable narrator. The situation Rachel is in is an emotional one, though, not a logical one. A different kind of ethos needs to be established for the reader to continue to support Rachel and see her point of view in this controversial topic. In chapter eight of the novel, Rachel has a conversation with her friend Ethan, who has known both her and Darcy since childhood. She confides in him her feelings for Dex, which have grown, and the seriousness of their continuing affair.
After spilling the beans, Rachel narrates to the reader: “I’m relieved that he is not preachy and serious. That’s not Ethan’s style, but you never know when someone is going to take the moral high ground. And there is definitely moral high ground all around here, particularly considering that Darcy is a friend of his too. Not as close as he and I are, but they still talk occasionally.” (Giffin 92-93) Not only is Giffin using this part to subtly acknowledge that she is aware that her readers could still change their minds about supporting Rachel, but Giffin is also showing the readers that Rachel knows that what she is doing is wrong.
Further into their conversation, Ethan tells Rachel that he is somewhat amused by the poetic justice of the situation. Rachel is surprised to hear Ethan speak of a life-long competition between her and Darcy. Ethan brings up a story from high school in which Darcy lied about her SAT score to beat Rachel’s, and then later used this lie to justify why she got accepted into Notre Dame (Rachel’s first choice school) and Rachel did not; Darcy’s acceptance into Notre Dame turned out to be another lie. Rachel remembers, “I didn’t care that she lied per se. She was a known embellisher. But the fact that she lied about her score to beat me by five – that part really figured. We didn’t call her on it. There was no point.” (Giffin 95)
In present time, Rachel adds, “I’m glad that Ethan refreshed my memory about Notre Dame…Yes, Darcy could be a good friend – she usually was – but she also screwed me at a few pivotal moments in life: first love, college dreams. Those were no small matters.” (Giffin 97) Giffin uses the deterioration of Darcy’s character to provide ethos for Rachel. While a reader may still not agree with infidelity, she is now being turned against Darcy with purpose – the purpose of indentifying with and supporting Rachel.
Of course, there will always be readers who will not be swayed by Giffin’s techniques. Seitz says that readers can be submissive or resistant to a text. (Seitz 150) When the reader is submissive to the text, she gets caught up in the romance between Rachel and Dex and roots for them to be together, because that is primary goal of the author. When the reader is being resistant to the text, she may side with Darcy, or at the very least deem infidelity wrong on any account, regardless of the circumstances or the methods Giffin has enlisted above. From this perspective, a reader may not feel a push to cheer for Rachel and Dex and may hope for or see a different kind of ending coming.
When the reader can flip back and forth between these two perspectives, she can gain a well-rounded sense of what the author wanted them to feel and what kinds of ending the book may have. Being a capable reader and even a resistant reader does not have to ruin the story. It allows readers such as myself to see exactly how the author has captivated me, despite my projections about morality and infidelity. Not only can I appreciate how Giffin has crafted the novel, but I can switch back to being a submissive reader and be swept along in the story. To this day, I still bite my nails in anticipation of the ending, even though I know what’s coming.
Works Cited
Giffin, Emily. Something Borrowed. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2005. Print.
Seitz, James. "A Rhetoric of Reading." From Rebirth of Rhetoric: Essays in Language, Culture & Education. Ed. Richard Andrews. Place of Publication: Routledge, 1992. 141-155. Print.
Selzer, Jack. “Rhetorical Analysis: Understanding How Texts Persuade Readers.” What Writing Does: An Introduction to Analyzing Texts and Textual Practices. Ed. Charles Bazerman and Paul Prior. Place of Publication: Routledge, 2003. 279-308. Print.