Writing Grief: Margaret Laurence and the Work of Mourning

W.J. Keith is a retired professor of English at the University of Toronto and author A Sense of Style: Studies in the Art of Fiction in English-Speaking Canada.

Writing Grief focuses relentlessly on the theme of mourning in the
fiction of Margaret Laurence—“mourning” employed not merely in the
popular sense of the word, grieving and lamenting for the dead, but in
the more specialized meaning, the feeling and expression of sorrow or
grief. This means, unfortunately, that Riegel’s emphasis is primarily
sociological rather than literary.

Try as I may, as a literary critic I can find no raison d’кtre for
the book. Riegel tells us that “Laurence has a keen interest in the
effects of death on the daily lives of the survivors,” but one wonders
if there are any serious novelists for whom this statement does not
apply. To be sure, he tries to link this interest with the fact that
Laurence lost both parents at an early age, but so did Ethel Wilson (at
least as fine a Canadian novelist as Laurence), who is never mentioned
here. Indeed, virtually no comparisons are offered with other novelists.
Only in the final chapter is any attempt made to consider Laurence
within a literary tradition, and then Riegel oddly confines himself to
the poetic tradition of elegy, and in any case makes only simple
generalizations.

Laurence’s books, then, are read here not as novels but as
sociological examples or psychological case studies. She is quoted for
her meanings, not for the implications (let alone the quality) of her
prose. Critics and commentators are often quoted but never engaged with.
Minor variants of the formula “Literary critic ___ remarks that ...”
become oppressive. Moreover, the writing is remarkable for its
naпveté. When faced with such statements as “Language means in these
books” and “Criticism of A Bird in the House has frequently
concerned itself with structure and form,” all one can say is,
“Well, I should hope so!”

This is a book that might be of some use to bereavement counsellors,
but, since it omits all that makes Laurence interesting as a creative
writer, it has little or none for genuine literary criticism.