World Book Night – Giveaway

EXTENSION: you have until tomorrow 10am (GMT) to enter.

As some of you might already know, I have been chosen as a giver for World Book Night.  Following the example set by other bloggers, such as Boof @The Book Whisperer and Teadevotee @amused, bemused and confused, I have decided to hold a giveaway on this blog.

World Book Night is a massive event organised for the first time in the UK and Ireland.  To celebrate World Book Day, publishers, authors and other parties have got together to create World Book Night.  For the occasion, one million books will be given on that night (day).  People were asked to choose from a set list a book they would like to share and explain why.  20000 givers were then chosen, each will receive 48 copies of the title.

On Friday night, a public event held at London’s Trafalgar Square will welcome 10000 people to listen to readings from some of the authors.  Margaret Atwood, Mark Haddon, Philip Pullman and many more will be present.  I would have loved to go - I think it will be a fantastic night – but, unfortunately, I reside a bit too far.

I was over the moon to see that The Blind Assassin, written by Margaret Atwood and published by Virago, was on that list.  Margaret Atwood is my favourite author and The Blind Assassin is a fantastic book, which I have shared many times before and will be delighted to share another 48 times on Saturday.  This week, you have thus the opportunity to win one of the copies on this blog.

To win, it’s simple (actually not THAT simple; I like a bit of a challenge!).  Fill the form below with your details and the answers to the following questions (you can find all the answers on this blog and I will be nice and give you a hint: click on Atwood!).  This giveaway is open internationally and will end on Friday night at midnight (GMT).  Good luck!

• Next fall, a new Atwood’s non-fiction book will come out.  In Other Worlds is a collection of lectures she gave on science-fiction.  In the past, she has published other such books; one being a collection of the Empson lectures she gave at Cambridge.  What is the name of this book?
• Atwood has published eight collections of short stories/fictions.  Only one of them is a short story cycle or hybrid-novel.  What is the name of its main narrator?
• Atwood playfully, but very seriously also, revises Dickens’s A Christmas Carol to highlight the debt we owe to the planet.  What is the title of the book in which she does that?

For those of you who have not been chosen, but still would like to share a book on this particular day, an alternative way of celebrating has been suggested.  Although I do not entirely believe the giveaway will affect independent bookshops badly, as has been suggested, I think this alternative World Book Night is a great and fun idea to still take part in the event.  It simply consists of people buying a book from an independent seller and giving it away on that day, thus supporting the book industry.  It has been said that World Book Night could impact negatively on independent booksellers, but I think the event is about sharing your passion for reading and for a certain book and ultimately could increase sales.  I certainly hope that people who receive a book from me will rush to buy more of Atwood’s books!

One last treat for you: a link to a page where you can find interviews of some of the authors featured in World Book Night.

Name(required)

Email(required)

Website

Answers(required)

Earth Hour 2011, D-26: Turn Off the Lights

This is my 4th year taking part in the Earth Hour, a global event aimed at raising awareness about sustainability issues.  This year, I have decided to write a daily post during the month leading to the event in order to share some thoughts about the environment and give tips the little changes we can make in our daily lives.  There will also be some guest posts by fellow bloggers who will share their own views on a topic related to the environment.  You can read my introductory post here and access the Earth Hour website here.

I encourage you to comment and share your own tips, ideas and experience.  In the last couple of days before the event I will do a few posts about what readers had to say.  I believe we can learn a lot by sharing!

As the Earth Hour’s symbolic gesture is to turn off the lights for an hour, I thought this would be my first practical tip.  Turn off the light when you don’t need it!

Does this seem a bit too obvious for you?  It is really, yet how many people actually do it?  How many people leave their outside light on all night?  How many people get back home in the evening and turn on all the lights in the house?

I know too well, I used to be like that.  I used to get home and leave the lights on in corridors until I would go to bed, or in the kitchen while something would be cooking in the oven (I doubt the pizza tasted any better because the lights were on).  My boyfriend at the time would remonstrate me, but I used to ignore his remarks thinking that it would not make a difference.

But it does!  Imagine if we all kept only the light in the room we are in turned on.  We can already see the savings made during one hour with the Earth Hour, so the difference could be huge if we were to do that every day.  Then, maybe offices and shops would follow the movement and turn off their lights when they are closed.  Hotels and other such places might use timers rather than having lights on all the time.  We, as individuals, can make those small changes.  They are not insignificant; they add up and might have a much bigger impact than we expect.

By taking part in the Eath Hour in 2008, I realised that.  It was a bit of an effort at first and a conscious gesture.  I would often forget to turn off the light and had to go back to do so, but it soon became a habit and now I don’t even think about it.  Most of the time it is just laziness when people don’t turn off the light, but honestly how difficult is it to lift up your hand and press the switch?

And why not replace your bulbs with the eco-bulbs as well?  They are now much more affordable than they used to be and they have also improved the light coming from them, which used to be an issue for me as I found it very difficult to read with them.  They do last longer, utilise a lot less energy and are recyclable.

I have already done these changes and thought about what other changes I could make.  Then, I noticed that in my study there are two lights controlled by only one switch (badly conceived!) and I really use only one of these.  I have just taken off the bulb of the second one - it is useless and just a waste of energy – and got a little lamp instead for when I need light in that part of the room.

Any other ideas of what other ”lights” changes I could make?

Earth Hour 2011, D-27: Change Attitude

 

This is my 4th year taking part in the Earth Hour, a global event aimed at raising awareness about sustainability issues.  This year, I have decided to write a daily post during the month leading to the event in order to share some thoughts about the environment and give tips the little changes we can make in our daily lives.  There will also be some guest posts by fellow bloggers who will share their own views on a topic related to the environment.  You can read my introductory post here and access the Earth Hour website here.

I encourage you to comment and share your own tips, ideas and experience.  In the last couple of days before the event I will do a few posts about what readers had to say.  I believe we can learn a lot by sharing!

I find that the first obstacle encountered in the protection of the environment is one of attitude from human beings.  It is not necessarily that people do not agree with the fact that we should treat the planet better, but rather that they feel powerless.  Obviously, I, as an individual, have very little impact.  Yet, I believe that talking and trying to convince people to adopt a different attitude towards the planet might make a difference.

I’m known for ranting about the changes we can make.  The usual reaction I get is one of “sure, whatever changes I make won’t matter”.  I disagree!  If we all make changes, it will make a difference.  If I talk to ten persons and manage to convince them that they can make a difference, these ten persons might also work on convincing other people and together we might make a significant impact and perhaps even influence people who have more power.

It all begins with a change of attitude: become aware that we can slow down the damage we are doing to the planet and act, even if it is only at a small level.  It all adds up and has some repercussions.  I believe this is what Earth Hour is all about: get people to adopt a “I can make a difference” attitude.

Think about it…

Earth Hour 2011

 

Some of you might already be aware that on the 26th of March at 8.30pm (local hour) the Earth Hour will take place.  This event began in Sydney, Australia, in 2007.  For one hour, participants are asked to turned their lights in order to raise awareness about the changes we can make for the planet. 

There is a little controversy around the event as some believe that it is pointless and will not make any difference.  However, it is not about the savings made during this hour, but rather about the savings we could make all year round if we were a bit more conscious and careful.

For me, the Earth Hour began in 2008.  At the time, I had just moved from Waterford to East Cork, in a village in the Irish countryside.  I started becoming more conscious about the way we led our lives in a fast-paced society and realised that little details could make a difference, like smiling to people in the street.  When I heard about the Earth Hour, I embraced the idea.  For more than an hour, I turned off all source of electricity in the house, including my fridge.  I sat down with a blanket, a few candles, a pen and paper, and reflected about the changes I could make.  Since then, I have tried to improve my habits and make them more eco-friendly.  I am not a tree-hugger, but I realised that we could all make a difference just by changing our habits and adopting a different attitude.  At the pace things are going, mother Earth is not going to be able to provide for us much longer and we need at least to slow things down.

That year, I talked about the event on Facebook, trying to promote it.  After the Earth Hour had taken place, a woman emailed me to thank me to have brought this event to her attention.  For her, it had taken an even more important dimension than for me.  She sat down with her two sons and was able to talk to them without the playstation or tv being on.  She then discovered that one of them wanted to learn how to play the guitar and the other one to practice a sport.  She had no idea…

This is what I mean when I say the Earth Hour is much more than turning the lights off for an hour.  It is about reflecting on our lives and the world we live in.

For the next two years, I was working for the Earth Hour, in a restaurant.  I could not imagine not taking part to the event and I made that clear to my boss.  He let me bring the Earth Hour in the restaurant.  At 8.30pm (the busiest time in a restaurant), I turned off the lights, the stereo and the heating in the restaurant room.  I had previously put extra candles on the tables and given customers little flyers in which I explained the purpose of the Earth Hour.  Most customers loved it and thought it was a brilliant idea.  I hope it had an impact on some of them.

This year, I will not be working.  I will probably be at home with a book in front of the fire.  However, I want my Earth Hour to be more than that.  Since the first year, I have changed many of my habits and I keep trying to improve them and find new little things I could do.  I realise that for many, some of these habits are not necessarily evident.  They are in a way, but one might not think of them.  I have thus decided to run a feature on this blog for the month preceding the event.  I will offer tips and thoughts about how to become more conscious about the environment and more eco-friendly.  Four other bloggers will also join me to discuss a topic related to the environment in one way or another: David @Tiny Planet, Shannon @Giraffe Days, Steph @Bella’s Bookshelves and Brigid @Kookaburra.

I hope you will enjoy this feature and that it makes you reflect on what changes you can make to preserve the planet.  I encourage you to comment and leave your own thoughts, suggest more tips or share how you intend to spend the hour.  In the couple of days before the Earth Hour I will put up some posts with all the readers’ tips that have been suggested and with some of your experiences and thoughts.  I think we can learn a lot by sharing.

Links related to this post:

• The Earth Hour website
• The Earth Hour facebook page
• My Earth Hour 2008: before and after the event
• My Earth Hour 2009

“La mort de l’auteur”/”The Death of the Author” by Roland Barthes

Although I had heard and read a lot about “La mort de l’auteur” (“The Death of the Author”) by Roland Barthes, I had never read it in its entirety.  I found it nice to be able to read and understand Barthes in French for once.  I know, I should be able to read in French, but I find literary theory more difficult to understand in French than in English.  As a result, it is such an effort for me to read French theory in its original language that I tend to avoid it.  However, this essay is easier to understand than other essays written by Barthes.

“La mort de l’auteur” was originally published in 1967 in the American journal Aspen and only appeared in its French version in 1968 in the journal Manteia.  Roland Barthes is a structuralist, and later post-structuralist, whose interest in semotics is evident in many of his works, including “La mort de l’auteur”.

“La mort de l’auteur” is probably his most controversial essay; however, the ideas he proposes in it are not as extreme as the essay title would suggest.  In fact, I think that most of what he argues makes a lot of sense.

Barthes’s essay can be seen as a reaction to critics’ and readers’ urge to find the author’s ultimate meaning in a text.  What Barthes argues is that the text exists in the here and now, that it is enunciated/read, and that there are multiple interpretations to a text.  The author as we know him is the one we construct through reading the text.  Barthes thus proposes that instead of deciphering a text to find the author’s message, we should untangle its various meanings.  When talking of a text, Barthes uses weaving metaphors, which actually lie in the latin origin of the word text.  He differentiates between the text and the work.  The work is material, whereas the text comprises many discourses and other texts that interact and result in our own interpretation.  The way we interpret the text relies on intertextuality.  The text is thus fluid and has infinite meanings.  Although he does not directly refer to intertextuality in “La mort de l’auteur”, Barthes’s argument points to this concept:

“un texte est fait d’écritures multiples, issues de plusieurs cultures et qui entrent les unes avec les autres en dialogue, en parodie, en contestation ; mais il y a un lieu où cette multiplicité se rassemble, et ce lieu, ce n’est pas l’auteur, comme on l’a dit jusqu’à present, c’est le lecteur”

“a text is composed of multiple writings, issued from various cultures that intersect through dialogue, parody, contestation; but the only place where this multiplicity is unified is not the author, as we have said until now, but the reader”

Therefore, according to Barthes, we should not try to explain texts by looking at their authors, but rather by looking at the language and how it speaks to us.  For him, it is the langage that creates meaning, not the author.  He notes that:

“l’écriture est la destruction de toute voix, de toute origine” 

“writing leads the destruction of the voice, of the origin”

Indeed, authors cannot control the meaning that will be given to their texts.  This so-called message of the author can only be a supposition from the reader.  Moreover, texts take on a life of their own by surviving their authors and being read year after year, century after century, by various readers who will impose their own interpretation on the text.

This is something important for Barthes because it enables us to resist the totality of the message from an over-controlling author, that is to resist ideology.

“un texte n’est pas fait d’une ligne de mots, dégageant un sens unique, en quelque sorte théologique (qui serait le ‘message’ de l’Auteur-Dieu), mais un espace à dimensions multiples, où se marient et se contestant des écritures variées, dont aucune n’est originelle: le texte est un tissue de citations, issues des mille foyers de la culture”

“a text is not composed of a series of words, giving a single meaning, somehow theological (which would be the message of the Author-God), but a site with multiple dimensions, where various writings interact and contest each other, none of which original: the text is a fabric of quotations, from culture’s thousands of sources.”

What seems to shock the most in Barthes’s essay is that he replaces the Author by a scriptor, someone mainly laying words on the page.  This is somewhat disturbing taken out of its context.  However, I do not think that Barthes rejects the author as such, but rather the over-controlling author and the possibility to find the author’s meaning.  All we really have is the work, those words on the page and we are ultimately free to interpret them the way we want, depending on our own circumstances.  He therefore concludes that the only way to liberate the reader is to get rid of the Author:

“la naissance du lecteur doit se payer de la mort de l’Auteur”

“the birth of the reader necessitates the death of the Author”

Although Barthes’s statement is radical, I think his argument is convincing.  How does it make you feel?  How do you read a text?  Do you always try to find out about the author or do you give more importance to the significance it has for you?

In my opinion, the author is one of the texts we use to understand the work.  I believe we can only guess what the author’s intended message is.  Each of us creates her/his own meaning of the text and the text will have a specific significance for each of us, depending on our own context.  As we try to interpret the text, we might consider the author and, by doing so, we create the author through the text we have read, but also by using other texts about the author.  Ultimately, the meaning of the text results from our own interpretation and use of the texts and discourses surrounding us and our reading.

All translations are mine and are probably imperfect.  You can read the English version here.

“Foreigners” by Elisabeth Harvor

This week I visited New Brunswick with a short story by Elisabeth Harvor, “Foreigners”.

Elisabeth Harvor, born in 1936 in St John, is the daughter of Danish emigrants, so is Anna, the main character of her story “Foreigners”.

Anna is a trainee nurse in the Maritimes in 1957.  She appears as a discreet person, compliant, reserved and overshadowed by the eccentricity of her mother and extroversion of her sister.  Early in the narrative, we learn that she wants to quit her training, but is encouraged to pursue because it could be something she could fall back on (if she does not get married?).  As she goes back home on her days off we encounter her sister who is the centre of attention and the one who gets all the boyfriend.  However, Karl, a Norwegian who is the son of the vet and is admired for having learnt to speak perfect English so fast after moving to Canada, seems to be more interested in Anna than in Chess.  The mother, a strange and intriguing figure, facilitates the courtship between Anna and Karl.  As their relationship evolves to something more serious, Karl visits Anna regularly and together they go to spend a day in Anna’s family’s summer cottage.  There, they are welcome by the mother who acts, in Anna’s words, as if  she wanted to marry Karl herself.  After Karl goes away to Toronto and admits that they should see other people, Anna leaves the hospital and goes back home.  She eventually manages to mend things with Karl; however, we learn some of the things she hides from him about her mother and how unstable the latter is.

This is a strange story.  There is a lot in it and I did not know what to focus on.  I probably need to read it again to appreciate it better.  Its title, of course, draws attention to the foreigners who populate the story: the kitchen assistants who speak many languages, the Danish sailor who communicates with Anna by putting her hand on his crotch, Anna and her Danish family who have assimilated so well in Canada that Anna cannot even speak Danish, her cousin Kamille who is on a visit before moving to the State, the two Mormon visitors and Karl who is from Norway and remembers the second World War and the horrors perpetrated by the nazis.  The story can thus be seen as speaking about Canada as a multicultural country and the experience of immigrants there.

However, it is also about a young woman facing her options: should she keep studying for a job she hates or just get married as soon as she the opportunity presents itself?  She wants to do good and work hard to help the sick; but this is maybe just because no one as ever been interested in her.  Indeed, as soon as she has a suitor she feels that she can escape her hell in the hospital.  Her character is torn by various tensions.

Then, there is the mother.  Taking her into account makes us reconsider the whole story from a different angle.  She is a weird character and at no point can we really figure her out.  She is eccentric and extremely egocentric.  She manages to make her daughter’s relationship revolve around her, as if she were the instigator but also the one deserving the attention.  At the end of the story, Anna tells Karl stories about her mother; however, she does not tell the whole truth, which is partially shared with us though and makes us reconsider not only the character of the mother, but the whole story as well.  What else should we believe in the narrative?  What else is not told to us?

This is an interesting and intriguing story, which would probably deserve more attention than what I have been giving it here. 

Short Story Monday is hosted by John at The Book Mine Set.

Margaret Atwood and the Publishing Industry

Last week, the Tools of Change for Publishing Conference was on in New York.  One of the keynote addresses was given by Margaret Atwood.  She discusses the publishing industry, but also a topical issue of ebooks vs paper books.  Watch it if you haven’t already done so.  Not only is it informative, but it is also highly humourous.  I must also say that her Powerpoint presentation, with her own illustrations, deserves a special mention.

She also gave an interview for the occasion.

And for those of you who want to improve their book blogging skills, here is the advice that was given by some experts at the conference.

Cat library

Corentin Dombrecht is a belgian designer and he has created the perfect bookshelves for cat lovers.  Have a look:

Isn’t it cool?

It might create a bit of a fight in my house for who gets to occupy the cushy spot though, but I’m sure they would love it.

Would Tantrum fit as well as in his plastic box on top of the fridge?

Would Mischief be as elegant on it?

Would Kaos find it comfier than the sink?

Would Gypsy finally stop killing my plants?

Literary Blog Hop: Feb 17-20 & After Dark by Haruki Murakami

The Literary Blog Hop is a fortnightly event held at The Blue Bookcase prompting book bloggers to answer a question.

If you were going off to war (or some other similarly horrific situation) and could only take one book with you, which literary book would you take and why?

This is an interesting twist on the classic “desert island” question which sees people bringing their favourite longest book.  Here, we are going to war and the question consequently becomes more interestingly personal and psychological.

Would I want to bring a light book to uplift my spirits?  Or a book that gives me hope despite the terrible state of human condition?  Maybe I would prefer a philosophical book that would help me rationalise the incomprehensible human nature?

I think my choice would go for a book that gives me hope, hope that all is not lost, hope that there is still some good somewhere in the world, hope that maybe one day human beings will be able to live in peace.  The problem is that I do not believe this is possible, so I might have to choose a book that gives me hope that I will once more be able to enjoy the little pleasures of life and human encounters that make me smile.

To be honest, I find it difficult to find the book that would satisfy what I would be looking for in such a situation.  I am thinking about the books I have recently read, and the one coming closer is After Dark by Haruki Murakami.  As it happens, I have been meant to review this book for a few months, but have not come around to doing it.  Now is as good a time as any.

I had heard a lot about Murakami, about After Dark in particular, and had always thought I should read something by him.  When I went to Milan, I quickly realised that I had not brought enough books with me.  I was only in London airport, waiting for my second flight to get to Milan, and had already nearly finished one of the two books that were to be my companions during this trip, the second one being a novella.  I decided to visit the airport bookshop.  I was looking for a book that would not be to heavy, in weight and content, but not a plain holiday read either – I wanted a bit of substance.  Then, my eyes caught sight of a few books by Murakami and I thought that at last I was getting the occasion to read something by him!

I think I can safely say that it was my revelation of the year 2010.  I loved After Dark!  It made me feel good.  I find it difficult to explain why I felt that way.  After all, it is not the most uplifting book: a prostitute gets beaten up, the women working in the hotel have a secret past they are trying to leave behind and Eri, Mari’s sister, has been asleep for months and some obscure supernatural things happen to her.  However, I think that for me the relationships between the characters took precedence over everything else and gave me hope, hope that it is possible to find comfort and happiness in a world where the majority of people are twisted. 

The story takes place in the interval of a night.  During this night, a few characters’ paths meet.  They are strangers who become acquainted for the time of a few hours.  Amongst them are Mari, an avid reader whose sister’s beauty has always overshadowed her, and Takahashi, a musician on his way to a rehearsal.  They are both out for the night and will meet a few times through it.  We leave them at dawn when they separate at the subway station and the story is left hanging but is also full of possibilities for the future.

I thought Murakami utilises interesting narrative techniques.  I was especially intrigued by the “we” point of view he uses.  I do not think it is something I had encountered before, or at least not in the same way.  It includes us in the story as viewers and gives a cinematic dimension to the narrative.  I also liked the way there were a few storylines running in parallel to each other and sometimes intersecting.  Characters might be present in a few of the narratives, but we are never actually told if they are the same people and are left supposing, which gives an air of mystery to the story.  I also found the open-endedness of this story deeply satisfying and more realistic than a nicely tied-up closure.  It is open to the future and its potential; even if life is far from being an ideal situation, there is still some comfort and happy moments to be found.

Here are a few of the reasons why I would choose After Dark.  It is a substantial literary work, which, it seems to me, represents the complexity of human nature and life with a certain simplicity that gives me hope and would actually make me struggle to keep alive.

Three Short Plays, by Beckett

This week again I visited the Everyman Palace Theatre in Cork to see The Godot Company‘s production of three of Beckett’s short plays: Rough for Theatre I, Play and Not I.  People usually have a love or hate relationship with Beckett.  I love Beckett and Not I is one of my favourite plays.  This was just what I needed.  The extra treat was that the director, Sergio Amigo, and John Calder, a friend and publisher of Beckett, were there to introduce the plays and answer a few questions after the performance.

People often see Beckett as depressing and pessimistic.  I would argue that he is more realistic than anything else; the problem is that the reality of life is not the most pleasant and people generally do not like to face it.  If you actually look at his plays a bit more closely, you can see them as a celebration of human perseverance despite the grimness of human condition.  This is brilliantly illustrated by the blind man in Rough for Theatre I who, when asked why he does not let himself die, answers: “I’m not unhappy enough . . . unhappy, but not unhappy enough”.

Beckett was a strict stage director and his plays are actually still under copyright so that new productions have to follow his stage directions, which give indications on the slightest little detail such as lighting, movements and so on.  It thus does not leave much leeway for directors and actors to play with and interpretations can only be minimal.

As you might notice in the three plays here, Beckett’s protagonists are often crippled or incapacitated in one way or another.  They are also often people who need others to complement them.  The plays are thus relevant in today’s world where we live next to one another but are alone in the end. 

Language is another concern central in Beckett’s theatrical oeuvre.  Beckett, like many postmodernists saw language as inadequate to represent reality and as arbitrary.  His distrust for language can be seen in the way his plays got increasingly shorter and movements took precedence over language, but also in the imperfection of language to communicate: Beckett’s protagonists are often seen as delivering monologue rather than talking to each others.  His dialogues are also often humourous as a result of this discrepancy between language and reality he constantly tries to foreground.  I cannot help thinking of Winnie in Happy Days who keeps repeating “it’s a happy day!” while buried up to her neck. 

The lives of Beckett’s protagonists are like ours, weighed by the mundanity of life: one day after another getting us closer to the only certainty in life, death.  Yet, Beckett’s protagonists display endurance and still managed to get through the days.  Is it not the story of our lives?  As John Calder says: “He is writing about you”.

Rough for Theatre I was written in French in the late 1950′s.  It is about a blind street musician and a crippled in a wheelchair.  Their lives have no purpose any more, yet they keep on going and might find relief in the companionship their encounter brings.  They complement each other; however, their need for each other might be too overwhelming to find relief in such companionship.  It was a touching play and probably the most accessible of the three played that night.

Play is about a triangular love relationship.  Man, woman 1 and woman 2 are in urns, with only their heads appearing, and tell us the story of an affair twice.  It is fast-paced and there is no dialogue between them.  All their lines are prompted by a spot throwing a bright light on them.  During the questions and answers, the actresses explained how different it was for them to learn their parts as they could not interact with the other actors but had to deliver their lines at the right moment and perfect pace, without inflexions or facial expressions. 

This is the BBC version of Play, directed by Alan Rickman:

Not I is a monologue told by a female “Mouth” to an auditor in complete darkness, only Mouth is supposed to be lit by a spotlight.  It is a jumble of words delivered at a rapid pace and one can barely make any sense out of it.  Mouth tells the repressed unpleasant experience of this “tiny little girl”, insisting that it did not happen to her.  When Beckett produced this play, Billie Whitelaw played the role of Mouth.  However, Beckett suppressed the auditor, who wears a black robe and raises his hands in a gesture of impatience, for the stage performance as he thought that his presence did more harm than good to the play (see ubuweb).  I had actually forgotten about the auditor’s presence and was surprised to see him on stage.  His presence was distracting, particularly when he raised his arms in a gesture that did not seem like impatience. 

This is Billie Whitelaw’s performance: 

I have read The Complete Dramatic Works of Samuel Beckett, but as you might have understood from this post, the plays take another dimension when performed.  For instance, reading the words of Not I is nothing compared to watching it played; you need the pace of the delivery as it becomes so hypnotic.  It is not often that the shorter plays are produced; they are even less accessible than his other plays and Calder argued that, in them, Beckett tried to give only the essence and thus cut them to their bare minimum.  I certainly hope to see more in the future.

This is a link to a website dedicated to Beckett and offering many interesting resources.