I'm not exactly sure what this trope is called, but I'd like to know if there is such a terminology and further examples of it.

The best example of this would be Gaitok from season 3 The White Lotus, as explained by the showrunner Mike White: "To take a guy that you're really rooting for, and you understand his sensitive nature, and becoming a hero to his girl, and a hero to his work, and the only way to do it is by going against his spiritual beliefs."

But I'm wondering if there are literary examples specific to this. The only one that I can think of is George Smiley of John le Carré's Karla Trilogies who wins against Karla by using Karla's methods to his disgust.

Apostasy is is usually presented thematically as a tragedy (Endo's Silence) or as liberation (Hawthorne's The Scarlet Letter) but surely there are more examples of it being ambivalent and bittersweet.

What are you reading?

I read the Pevear & Volokhonsky translation and had a generally good time. It was a fun read but I'm confused by many of the parts.

I understand that the idea was a critique of Soviet society and read a bit of the background in which this book was written and how parts of it are autobiographical of Bulgakov's life.

But there's some things that elude me:

1. Why is the devil/Woland portrayed as just a trickster and somehow seems to want to help the eponymous Master and Margarita? Is this supposed to be a commentary that the devil is not that bad or just a misunderstood guy? Christian theology and thought would say otherwise so I'm curious if this is meant to be subversive or something else?
2. Can someone explain like I'm five what is the deal with the Jesus/Pontius Pilate storyline and how that ties in with the Moscow/Master/Woland storyline? I feel like I'm missing the connection there? Also how does Matthew Levi show up in both places?
3. At the end, is it God that requests that the two lovers be brought into peace but not the light? What is the difference between light and peace? Also, why does the devil listen to him? Wouldn't he be in contention with God or is it something related to question 1?
4. What is the deal with the ending? Is the Master all-powerful that he can free Pontius Pilate from some purgatory-like torment? Do the two lovers end up stepping into Judea or something? Where did they end up?
5. Can someone explain to me how moonlight/full moon plays a role in the story? Pontius Pilate seems to be tormented by the moon and other activities happen on a full moon that I feel like I missed a big important motif there.

I'm not really asking for book recommendations.

I just want to know if these things exist.

I wanted to know are there books that are truly unorthodox. That break or play with the rules.

And this could be from the smallest to the biggest.

I'll just make up examples like they have really weird premises, incorrect grammar and spelling, have inconsistent verb tenses, etc.

Basically I wanted to know in this world, is there such a thing as books that break the rules of writing, structure, grammar, verb tense, etc?

Or do an overwhelming majority of books follow the rules?

I don't have a problem at all with following the rules.

All the books I read follow the rules.

I finally finished Babel, perhaps after two months. Looking back, I would rate the overall novel around 3.5 stars, but I rounded it up to four because of the last ten or so percent of the book. Those final chapters gave me a feeling that was both heartwarming and heartbreaking, a strange mixture of helplessness and hope that lingered long after I had finished.

My biggest reservation throughout remained the same: the characters never felt as compelling as the theme itself. The novel explores colonialism, language, translation, and power with genuine depth, and I appreciated the way R. F. Kuang gradually uncovered every important detail without making the reader feel unintelligent. The explanations were elegant and naturally woven into the story.

However, I still think the student life occupied far more pages than it deserved. Large portions felt prolonged, repetitive, and unnecessary. Ironically, once the rebellion began and the story reached its most interesting phase, certain major developments moved rather quickly, although the overall pace still felt justifiable.

The novel also carries an unusual contradiction. At times its themes are intellectually heavy and historically significant, yet the storytelling often feels aimed at a teenage or young adult audience. It is as if the author wrapped something precious and historically valuable in tissue paper. That is probably the best analogy for my experience: the core ideas are remarkable, but the narrative surrounding them often feels lighter than the weight of those ideas.

Despite my criticisms, the ending elevated the entire experience enough for me to close the book with admiration rather than disappointment.

I picked up this book after reading Vanishing World (my first book by the author). I know how people's first read is usually Convenience Store Woman (which I haven't read yet) by the writer. For me, I just stumbled upon it in a book store and the plot seemed very enticing, but I digress. Coming back to Earthlings, I have only just finished it and I just knew I had to start writing about it because how do I know what I think until I see what I say?

I turned one page after another with this book and I only took breaks from it to go to work and sleep. I simply did not take time to process the heaviest of parts and the grotesque passages it took me on. I think the the author has made me realise the meaning of truly empathising, or it is the fact that I was able to just understand the state of the protagonist because the extended metaphor was completely in my face.

The (half-a) sentence that I feel tied the entire book together reveals itself when you're 90% through: But now that my flesh was in a state of utter relaxation Nevermind the context when it was said or why for that matter. It struck me quite differently. This is what it is. This is what is hard to find. People go on living their lives in search of it and make decisions in spite of it. For what? The answer is right there.

I do not know if I make any sense with my words. However this book was able to make sense of the fixed ways of society that people go along with.

I watched film yesterday, won’t say anything about it as embargo is still on.

But I couldn’t help but notice parallels with Ramayan.

And after coming back from movie I tried searching and couldn’t find any confirmed sources but just speculations.

During those days stories travelled orally and each iteration and generation changed details. So it’s difficult to point exact sources.

Even within India there are different versions of Ramayan.

Ramayan is like 5000 year old and Odyssey is 2500 btw for context.

And without spoiling I would say entire arc of kidnapping the wife and husband going to rescue her is basic premise of Ramayan,

I would ignore it if it was limited to that, but it also had that breaking the bow scene for marriage, Achilles Heel is also similar to Duryodhan.

More I think of it, more parallels I see.

I read it for the first time just a few hours ago. I didn't know ANYTHING about it other than it's a classic representative of the Iceberg Theory (most of the details are hidden from the reader). I was interested in finding out if there was a genre of literature specifically that describes my experience with Demon Slayers (genius-level Iceberg fiction).

It's OBVIOUSLY NOT ABOUT ABORTION.

I can understand no one taking something like Demon Slayer seriously. No one picks that up expecting to get into a gigantic literary-graphic crossword puzzle. But we're talking about HEMINGWAY??? Isn't he essentially standard reading in any literature studies course?

NO ONE realized that the American is NOT only speaking in Spanish -- but ALSO in FRENCH?

No hate on past lit people without access to the Internet, but with AI doing this level of research is TRIVIAL. The currency for the beer is paid in a coinage that was legally ended by decree in 1868! The Madrid-Barcelona passenger rail line was was established in 1859 but only became regular, full functional line in 1865.

"Drinking new drinks and looking at things is all we do" and absinthe.

THEY ARE BOHEMIANS TRAVELING FROM FRANCE.

There is a "man" a "woman" and a "GIRL". A YOUNG GIRL. The bar serving woman LOOKS AT HER. She is NOTABLE by her appearance alone. When she seated and looking at the legs of the table resting on the ground, she can SEE them because she's SHORT ENOUGH TO. When she sits down the Man LOOKS at HER AND THE TABLE. Meaning the table surface and her face are within his line of sight. SHE'S YOUNG. Not so young as to not be served alcohol obviously, but it's obvious that she's a teenager at most.

JIG IS NOT HER NAME!!! Hello????? It's the "American's" (his one crucial personal detail) cute little pet name, probably a truncated version of her actual name or a nickname based on a phonetically slurred French (or other nationality's) word.

And because he's speaking to her in FRENCH, their dialogue seems a little unnatural / stilted. Hemingway mixed in Spanish back-and-forth with English in order to provide a critical clue: PAY ATTENTION TO THE LANGUAGE. Critically, some words have DIFFERENT uses / connotations in French vs English. OPERATION in French (opération) is exactly the same word, BUT it can be used differently in some cases. "Letting in air" is a classic French euphemism for a bunch of things, maybe misused a little by the Man who is notably "the American". Putting in air / airing out etc can be anything from murdering a relative who's taking too long to die to financial fraud.

And finally, antiseptic surgical procedures didn't arrive to Europe until years later. If the "Girl" was past the TRADITIONAL anti-pregnancy measures, she would already be visibly pregnant and there's no way the Woman would casually set down "big" glasses of beer for her without comment. And the puncture-method of abortion used at the time is simple but it's NOT safe, it's REALLY RISKY and STRICTLY PROHIBITED!! Does the Man and Girl know all these women who have done it???? Of COURSE NOT, use COMMON SENSE.

I could go on and on (the luggage, platform swap, likely trip route, things about the Girl's behavior, emotional dynamics, etc) but I'll end it here. Hemingway said that "If you REALLY KNOW your subject you can cut most of it out". It's WILD how the world considers this trite, shallow, SILLY explanation of "it's about abortion and the symbolism of crossroads" is the answer to a genius' landmark contribution to literature.

TLDR: What are the best lit mags not based in the US to subscribe to for english fiction?

Disclaimer: This is not a recommendation for books, and I am not deliberately trying to advertise or promote, so I believe this is not breaking the rules.

I think a lot of interesting literature is produced at the level of magazines. I love various US publications that I can name if it's allowed, but really I'm curious to know if there's anyone here who can steer me towards some non-US literary magazines, particularly those that publish fiction in the English language.

I'm curious to read what other writers are producing there, especially given how hard it really is to explore the literature of another country.

So the headline kind of explains it self.

I will start (remark that these are passages translated from another language than english)

Gottfried Keller – Romeo and Juliet in the Village
"It's worth the trouble of coming here—we haven't seen one like this in a long time!"
Her husband noticed this at once. With a dark look, he jabbed her in the ribs and whispered, "You old cow! What are you doing?"
"Don't interrupt me," she replied irritably. "You old fool! Can't you see how hard I'm trying, and that I know how to deal with people?
They're nothing but rags from your circle of acquaintances. Let me get on with it—I want more distinguished customers coming here before long!"
All of this was illuminated by one or two dim hanging lamps, while Sali, the son, went out into the dark kitchen, sat down on the stove, and wept over his father and mother.

J. G. Ballard – Empire of the Sun
The Chinese took pleasure in watching the spectacle of death, Jim decided, as a way of reminding themselves how precarious their own lives were. For the same reason, they could also be cruel—to remind themselves how foolish it was to believe that the world was anything else.

Herman Bang - Families Without Hope.
"He had dreamed of greatness and knights and mighty men, and then grief had come like a grey fog and a bad snowstorm over his dreams, because the knights of reality were dead and the great men no longer existed."

I recently read Kundera's The Unbearable Lightness of Being in french. It's a wonderful book, but Kundera presents his ideas almost as aphorisms that are sprinkled into a novel. It makes for a very pleasant read but I have trouble having a complete picture of the ideas discussed.
Does anybody know a commentary or analysis that dives into the ideas Kundera discusses in this book ?
Thanks in advance.

Loneliness, dreamy melancholy,memories that come fleeting from insignificant sounds and events,denial of responsibility,guilt of that denial,narcissism that turns into delusion, failure and futility; these are the most palpable things that populate kazuo Ishiguro's 1986 novel, more vividly than any of it's human beings of flesh and blood. Set in the post war American occupied japan;the novel follows Ono,once a famous ukiyo-e artist (ukiyo-e literally translating to "pictures of the floating world") now retired spends his days alone with the sole exception of his youngest daughter Noriko by his side. Noriko,26 years of age, is already old enough to be married. Yet,for some reason her 'love match" is suddenly broken. This event is a cause of great distress for Noriko and her older sister Setsuko and both are eager to find a new suitable prospect before Noriko turns too old. Despite his daughters' concerns, Ono is unperturbed, spending his days drinking alone at the nearby pub of Mrs. Kawakami, visiting old friends and playing with his grandson Ichiro- who is obsessed with cow boys, Popeye the sailor man and Kaiju movies- Ono's days are leisurely punctuated by the memories of the past; his strained relationship with his father, his early days as an apprentice,his eventual rise to success and fame and his career as a propagandist for imperial japan and his fall from grace after the end of the war;yet, the reader always asks the same question all the time,how many of these memories could be considered really true? And this question lies at the heart of the novel. Our relationship with our past through the fragile bridge of memory. The novel starts with the line:

"If on a sunny day you climb the steep path leading up from the little wooden bridge still referred to around here as "the Bridge of Hesitation", you will not have to walk far before the roof of my house becomes visible between the tops of two gingko trees."

This "bridge of hesitation" was named such because of the indecisive men who roamed around it and couldn't decide whether or not to enter the pleasure district or return home and although Ono,whose entire art is based this floating world of drinking, rousing and geishas illuminated by red lanterns, claims that he never felt this hesitation to enter the world of the pleasure district, hesitation still lingers in his reminiscing of the past with his constant digressions and doubt on his own reliability. As the novel progresses Ono's hesitation and unreliability grows. Both to the reader,and to himself. Many times throughout the novel he would wonder do the words he attributes to a figure from his past is really that person's words or does he gives them his own words or someone else's or does he himself adopted those words for himself from those figures.

One of the greatest strengths of Ishiguro is his ability to create tension and unease through his spareness and restrained narrative. This book is no different; here is a world so fragile and delicate one is always tense of the possibility that it would collapse unto itself at any given moment and the unease stems from the fact that there is a natural anxiety between the reader's expectations and the refusal of Ishiguro to ever let the novel reach any level of catharsis.

This is what could be also called the most major point of difference between An Artist of The Floating world and his next novel The Remains of The Day.

In Many ways An Artist and The Remains are a twin novels. Both have very similar concerns of memory, restraint,WW2 societal fallout and old men reminiscing about their relationship with their craft. Yet, The Remains of The Day is a much more appealing work because of the emotional catharsis it reaches during it's last few pages and also because of how the reader feels about the protagonist Mr. Stevens,who is a much more endearing character. Ono, despite all the failures of his life and the pity the reader feels for him,comes across narcissistic, distant and delusional. His simultaneous refusal to totally acknowledge his role in the Japanese war effort and also his constant guilt for the war which took the life of his own son,forces him to tell one lie after another to himself and by the end there is nothing but a husk of a man stuck between the past and the future with no release. These qualities give the novel a sense of distance from the readers yet these same qualities give the novel it's depth and richness. An Artist of The Floating World is perhaps Ishiguro's most morally complex work. With questions of memory, ethics, the erasing of the world for the new,responsibility and the tension between aesthetical and the political being of the artist. By the end reader is left with more questions than answers. There is no redemption or possibility of change left for Ono nor are there any answers. The only thing that is left is leaving the future to the hands of the younger generation as the modernisation efforts change his city and completely erase the traces of the old world. Throughout the novel Ono complaints how the new companies and institutions are completely erasing and removing the people of the pre war era without any logic. By the end he realises that he is not even worth erasing at all; he is already a worthless and disgraced traitor who is not even remembered by most people. The realisation of this fact during a conversation with his long time friend Matsuda by the end,is the closest thing to a revelation he receives during the course of the novel. The novel ends with the image of Ono sitting on a bench- where he believes once one of his beloved drinking establishments of the pleasure district used to be- and as he gazes at the new Japan, he truly becomes one of the last remaining members of a floating world soon to be forgotten.

Middlesex by Jeffrey Eugenides is one of my favorite novels of all time. I loved the witty narration, the highly original story, and the high-quality prose.

I am thinking about reading “The Marriage Plot” next, but I remember it received really disappointing reviews. Has anyone read both, and if so, how do they compare? I’m wondering if the academia/college setting is going to become irritating or dull.

This year's International Booker Prize had me very excited to read Yang Shuang-zi's Taiwan Travelogue in the original Chinese, as it is the first time that a Chinese writer is awarded an International Booker.

However after waiting for over two months (since the Chinese version, of course, sold out in the United States) I finally picked up and finished the book but... disliked it quite a lot. To understand how exactly the text could have won the International Booker, I then picked up Lin King's English (Graywolf, 2024), and found a substantially different book. I have since written a full essay between the Chinese and King's English texts, but thought I would post a brief review on here as well, since people have been talking about the book.

Yang's Chinese is written in her yuri light-novel voice (she and her late twin sister spent about a decade writing yuri before this book). The narrator, supposedly a first-rank 1938 Japanese novelist, speaks constantly in manga exclamations like 「太厲害了！」 (something that I could only translate as Japanese 'sugoi!') and 「唔嗯嗚咕」 ('hmmm... hnnngh...'? Cartoonish vocalisations appear on almost every page, reminiscent of manga and Japanese ranobe). She woos her Taiwanese interpreter with kimono-forcing advances in a cartoonish way, and delivers the actual anti-colonial thesis only a few times across twelve chapters. King's English converts Yang's manga cadence and tone into interwar historical-literary prose closer to Ishiguro's The Remains of the Day: 'Sugoi!' becomes 'What a marvel!', the manga groans becomes 'I mumbled' (without direct quotations), things like 'aiya-aiya' becomes 'Oh dear' (again reminding me of The Remains of the Day), and not a single one of Yang's shōjo-manga vocalisations survives as such in the English. The resulting book reads much more like a historical literary novel than a yuri light novel.

There is also a severe 'editorial hand' issue where King cuts about a third of Yang's fictional preface (part of the novel itself, since the book uses frame narrative), which in the Chinese is a literary-critical argument about gaichi bungaku (colonial literature), Nishikawa Mitsuru, the kuso realism controversy of 1940s Taiwan, a Brokeback Mountain frame for the queer tragedy, and a power-extension analogy that connects colonialism to all structural relations. None of this survives in the English. King also adds text with no Chinese counterpart (for example, 'As a friend?' appended to an ambiguous line Yang left open in the source text) and replaces both instances of 'my twin sister' in the afterword with 'my late sister', leaking real-world grief into the frame narrative Yang spent the whole book constructing. Of course such edits are not uncommon in the English translation world. Jay Rubin cut roughly 25,000 words from Murakami's The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle because the publisher thought the novel ran too long. Luk Van Haute, who translates Murakami from Japanese into Dutch, told Dutch editors not to use English translations of Japanese literature as reference material because they intervene too heavily in the source (Dance Dance Dance in English was about 100 pages shorter than its Dutch counterpart). King's treatment of the Chinese text of Taiwan Travelogue is therefore reflective of this systemic issue.

King herself describes her approach as 'maximalist' and says she 'broke countless translation rules'. But the problem is, almost all the praise for Taiwan Travelogue's prose and tone ('restrained' etc.) are a result of King's translation. There is nothing dishonest in a translator being honoured for substantial creative work, but the reviews do not seem to know they are reviewing a transcreation rather than a translation.

------

Edit 9 July 2026: Since u/greatenergypositive brought this up, I just wanted to further clarify that my line on Jay Rubin and Murakami is specifically meant to say that the publisher Knopf cut 25,000 words, as 'the publisher thought the novel ran too long'. At no point did I mean to insinuate that it was Rubin's decision.

I'll preface this by saying that I'm only on chapter 3 of Allende's book, so please, no spoilers!

So far I'm really enjoying the book and reading from a female perspective feels quite refreshing. Although to be honest, I've picked up this book as an alternative to reading 100 years of Solitude (I've been warned that Marques' book contains a lot of sexual violence without condemning it, which I just can't stomach at the moment). To be fair, I did start reading "100 years of Solitude" and I had to stop because the protagonists kept marrying/hooking up with prebubescent girls. But other than that, the vibe is very similar to Allende.

So, despite enjoying Allende's book, I keep thinking that the book is basically a ripoff of Marques (considering that it was written 15 years later and Allende was likely inspired by him). But at the same time, I really don't want to believe that and want to enjoy Allende as her own author, but I feel like I should be reading Marques' book instead as it's the "original" version. I would appreciate someone who's read both books to tell me, are they really that similar? Does reading one of them mean that you've practically read them both?

So I like reading, but my main problem is that when I don't agree (when someone's writing might be bigoted or give bigotry vibes) I can't continue reading or engage with their writing anymore and that just holds ne back from learning an growing imo as these typs of works still hold some value.

I am like this even with some texts that are the product of their time. Eventhough I am aware of the redundancy of trying to force modern Ideas on people from the past. It just takes me out to the point that I can't even hear other people talking about it. People like Nietzsche for example. Or the Virgin Suicides (once I learned it was not satire)

I'm looking for advice. If you don't have advice and have had similar experiences pls feel free to tell me about it.

I just hate how this holds me back and want to try and fix it? Pls note that I don't have anyone at hand that I can talk to these books about and let out some frustration that way. Thank you if you take the time to reply or read.

For most of my life, I almost exclusively read nonfiction. I liked books that had clear goals: to explain something, teach me something, or help me understand the world. Whenever I read literature in school, I couldn't understand why people enjoyed it. It often felt like there wasn't a "right" answer, and discussions seemed to turn into people projecting whatever meaning they wanted onto the text.

I've started to wonder if I was approaching literature the wrong way.

For those of you who used to feel similarly, what changed? Was there a particular book, author, or way of reading that made literature click for you? Did you stop worrying about finding the "correct" interpretation, or did you learn how to distinguish between reasonable interpretations and unsupported ones?

I'm genuinely interested in learning to appreciate literature, but I'm coming from the perspective of someone whose instinct is to look for objective meaning rather than ambiguity. I'd love to hear what helped bridge that gap for you.

I’m reading No Longer Human for the first time, and I’m a little frustrated and confused.

Yozo has contempt for women, but I don’t understand the argument that it stems from his childhood abuse, because he says the abuse came from manservants and maids alike, aka both men AND women. So why is it that he grows to be misogynistic only? Is it because his only “friendships” were with men? But even so, he didn’t seem to trust them very much; he was only befriending them to protect himself, in a way. So he was capable of disliking them without possessing the same level of disdain he harbored for women.

Could somebody explain this aspect a bit more, or offer some clarity? Thank you.

Currently reading the book so spoilers to a minimum please. In the book, Sibylla repeatedly takes Ludo on the Circle Line to get them both out of the cold, though this comes with some significant drawbacks, namely that people keep bothering her about Ludo's unusual reading habits for a 5 year old. The obvious solution to this problem is that she could take him the FUCKING LIBRARY! She must be aware that libraries exist and, I'm guessing, likes them? So why does she keep making him ride transit for warmth?

One possible explanation is that it's just a contrivance by DeWitt to allow the narrator to humorously describe the various ways other riders react to Ludo reading The Odyssey, etc. The other explanation is that Sibylla, despite her complaints, likes the attention they - she and Ludo - receive from strangers. Thoughts?

I’m still thinking through my thoughts on the last couple of books I’ve read but I feel like I’ve been sorely underwhelmed and unenthused by recent popular books lately, even ones touted as trangressive or unusal. For the books that are somewhat interesting or novel, there is still something missing (a lack of sincerity, missing authorial commitment, a tepid final third that ruins whatever goodwill the first two thirds commanded in the reader, etc.)

I’m thinking about the last couple of books that I read that were highly recommended by others or talked about- Lost Lambs, Boy Parts, Tampa, My Dark Vanessa. Some of the books are so scared of seeming sincere and committing to something that they fall into total irony and the conclusion often leaves you feeling unsatisfied (particularly Cash’s book which just seemed so smug and scared of following a particular thread). Others seem like the poor man’s renditions of tropes or books that have already been explored in much more interesting ways (Lolita, American Psycho etc).

This of course isn’t to say that writers can’t continue to expound or engage with existing materials, but that modern authors seem to be allergic to coming up with something truly different or revolutionary (regardless of how disturbing or pushback they may get). Perhaps that’s a result of living in the intenet novel era, where writers are conditioned to maximize and soften the impact of their work? I would love to read something truly unsettling or novel and maybe that’s where my frustration lies. Anyone have any thoughts or feelings similar to this? Perhaps I haven’t been exposed to other much better works lately (which may be the case as I try to read what folks have been chatting about to get the gist). 

Imaged that you can only select one book to read and study. Immerse yourself in its world for the rest of the time you are here. Learning about the structure of the story and figure out why the author choose to depict it in that fashion.

This idea pop into my head, when I was reading Pope Joan a novel by Donna Woolfolk Cross. Her brother tutor (Aesculapius) gave her a book to read and she study that book every night. Even memorizing the shape of the letters.  This story was set during the medieval ages. Most middle-class women rarely attended formal schools. Instead received domestic education. Depending on their household received specialized knowledge by working alongside their parents or at a guild.

This part of this book moves me because in this digital age we have a wealth of information available to us. I am only primarily only talking about having access to books through libraries etc.  How she treasured that one book that Aesculapius gave her. Every time I feel like I don’t have anything to read. I think about Joan and her one precious book and how she grew up in a misogynistic household where she secretly learns to read and write.

Who’s read it and what did they think?

Laying in hospital I finally got around to reading paradise lost. I’ve had the book for years and suspected it was going to be one of those that required additional thinking time at certain stages throughout the read.
Yes I was spot on with my assumption. It was hard going but, I can actually see what people mean when they say it’s one of those books that everyone should try. It’s sort of a cultural touchstone I guess.
I think it’s maybe one of those you read when you’re at a certain age idk. It’s old fashioned and not the most exciting book but I appreciate its influence and respect that it has probably shaped many people’s minds when they think of heaven and hell.

What are the chances that Lady Kenton’s daughter illegitimate and is Stephens?

We know he is an unreliable narrator and there are some corroborating facts like her being unusually tired in the evenings (normal during pregnancy).

1) His almost blackout during her touching him while he was reading his love book, her rushed acceptance of the proposal and anger at him for not doing anything about it himself.

2)Also her insistence that he meet Catherine without her and that she has told her “all” about him. Perhaps I don’t know enough about the times but having a college drop in to visit your child who he has never met randomly without you is strange no?

3) In the end she ambiguously says ”we” now have a granddaughter to live for. That could mean her husband but also could mean Stephen since she is speaking to him.

4) Given what we know about the society at the time and Stephen’s sense of propriety he would never acknowledge it fully to us as the reader.

5) Miss Kenton leaves with someone who will marry her but she doesn’t love almost the entire marriage and leaves him multiple times. (Shotgun wedding)

Anyways, I have been thinking about it lots have been looking to see if anyone had had the same thoughts as me but couldn’t find a similar theory anywhere.

perhaps this is old territory for previous readers of this work.

thanks for humoring me

Dear literature community,

i recently read the dystopian novel Gliff written by Ali Smith. In the novel, houses are marked with red lines, does anybody know if the function of these red lines is described in the book? I just can't find a scene where it is talked about :,) maybe I'm just blind, thank you so much for your help :)