The final paragraph of Written on the Body begins with the line, “This is where the story starts, in this threadbare room” and ends with the line “I don’t know if this is a happy ending but here we are let loose in open fields.” I believe these lines are much more clear than they are ambiguous. The reason this story is appealing is due to the fact that it can appeal to a wide variety of people, for many people can take the place of the narrator.
What struck me about this book is that I believe it can be read forward, or backward. Due to the complexity and breakdown of the standard use of time, this book is able to be read in any order, and still arrive at the same affect. The lines in the final paragraph highlight this. For example, this is where the story starts, and I don’t know if this is a happy ending. The juxtaposition sets of a complex that allows the reader to once again interpret the novel how they want to. Is this where the story starts? Or is it where it begins?
The use of time in the story is minimal, for the order of events seems irrelevant and at times out of place. Therefore, the standard understanding of time is undermined, just as the typical understanding of a narrator is altered. If time in the book is atypical, as is the use of narration and story telling, then why not allow for varying interpretations? Written on the Body is important due to that exact reason.
It’s interesting to think of this book as not only non-linear in its narration, but with the possibility of being non-linear in its reading. It made me think about the first line of the book, “Why is the measure of love lost?” which is repeated multiple times throughout the novel. How would the story have ended differently if it had ended with that line? Perhaps that would have given too definitive of an answer regarding what happened to Louise, especially if the author is trying to keep the book open ended, in order to appeal to a wider audience, as you’ve suggested.
I think your analysis of the last part of the novel illustrates well the argument of Judith Halberstam’s in “Queer Temporality and Post Modern Geographies”. Indeed queer time has “the potential to open up new life narratives and alternative relations to time and space” (2). Throughout the novel, time is measured in various ways: months, relationships, losses. Queer time enables us to break the ordinary pattern and to think about time differently. However, unlike you, I think the last sentences remain ambiguous and can be interpreted according to the reader’s own understanding of the novel.
The concept of reading the novel backwards is a compelling one that works well in the context of the non-linear life that the narrator seems to lead. However, I question how this makes the novel more accessible to a wider range of readers. It would seem to me that the narrator’s life of cyclical affairs is far from relatable to most people.