Discussion of Marie Darrieussecq's Pig Tales: February 12-19, 2008. With the participation of Marie Darrieussecq.

I was very intrigued while reading “Pig Tales” because the lead character kept referring back to the state she was currently in and talking about her old life, which pushed me to keep reading.

I was happy to read that the female character liked gaining a few pounds, in the beginning of her transformation when she was still healthy, and so did her customers. The female character mentioned that she was very thin and attractive, so it was refreshing to see someone who appreciated her body and its curve more with extra weight. Before her weight becomes a burden to her, she is very positive and accepting of her new shape. It was refreshing to see a character embrace a bigger size, but when her weight and shape grew to the extent that she could no longer fit into her uniform, the marabout and doctors tried all these remedies to “fix”. I interpreted this as symbolizing drastic or even slight weight gain and having doctors, the diet industry, and the beauty industry bombard her with remedies to try to make her thin again. I did not focus so much on the literal transformation into a pig, but I did look at how the lead character was treated when did not look human. She was scorned for her size and her physical appearance, so much that she had to resort to living in the sewer.

Is the transformation into a pig, since it only happens when she is stressed, symbolic of binge eating? The character overly exerts herself and then transforms into a pig, she has no control over it and cannot predict when it will happen, but she cannot stop it. With regard to body image, at the end of the book when she decides to live as a pig is this symbolic of being comfortable in her skin? It seems she has decided to embrace her new shape and live in a world surrounded by others who are accepting of her.

Hello, thanks for your question. My English will be a bit "que sera que sera".

Body image... yes, I suppose the novel also deals with body image. I was happy myself to write about the happiness of gaining weight, and unhappy of the restrictions imposed by the social body on the main character. But it had to be that way. I was "living" inside that character while I was writing the novel, I mean I was speaking like her in my mind and writing ten hours a day. During those six weeks of writing she never leaved me. So I didn't have a real conscious "message" to deliver, I was just following my narrative instinct. I was working like a "sponge", receiving stress, pleasure and anger from the world and writing them back on the paper. A lot of anger.

What was amazing was the different readings this novel received, and yours is part of them. It goes from psychoanalysis to politics, gender issues, children tales narratology, or ecology... It's great that readers can find their own way through a text. That book got lucky to get so many readings. There was disgust, too. Some people got very angry with it.

I still think, as at that time (12 years ago) that literature is made of questions and not answers. No message : ambiguity. The opposite of a lecture (une leçon). But I'll make an effort for that forum.

The most striking theme that I picked up on in my reading of “Pig Tales” is some type of struggle between being “human” and being a “pig”. Throughout my reading of “Pig Tales” I found myself somewhat puzzled as to the nature of the main character. At times I actually got the slight feeling that there are in fact no humans in the book and they are all pigs. This idea was disproved towards the end when it becomes obvious that she has really transformed. I paid attention particularly to those times and the events that took place when she was described as being human and then suddenly back to a pig on all fours and rolling around in the humus.

“Then things began to happen fast. I don’t like leaving my lair, I was naturally rather upset the day we moved, so I was a complete pig: snout, trotters, protruding rump – simply impossible to disguise. Yvan had to cram me in a large bag, but when I’m a sow I get really claustrophobic and I couldn’t stand it in there.” (136)

After reading this, I realized that throughout the book her “pig” qualities seemed to appear whenever she felt stress or anger. This also brings up the question of what may have caused this transformation in the first place? Her job and the stress of needing to achieve perfection in order to please her customers is one reason that I came up with.

I thought about the last sentence of the book for quite a while:
“… when I crane my neck toward the Moon, it’s to show, once again, a human face.”

I always associate looking up towards the sky in the typical cliché sort of way. That she is possibly looking up to something better than the situation she is in. Also, she is hopeful that it is achievable.

There are a couple references in the book to Muslims and Arabs. I was wondering if there was any intentional connection to the fact that she is transforming into a pig, a forbidden food in the Muslim religion?

Also, I noticed that there are no distinct paragraphs throughout the novel. This gives the sense of continuation. The only time ideas are allowed to change, even though it may not feel this way to the reader, is when the paragraph is set apart and a new one begins.

Thank you for your rich, open and stimulating reading of “Pig tales”. To me it’s rather a story of hesitation than transformation. More a story of “vacillation” (en français) than of metamorphosis. When readers evoque Kafka, I think (without even daring to compare further) that there are two differences : Kafka ignores the female body ; Gregor Samsa’s story starts with a complete, radical and irreversible metamorphosis.

I don’t know what caused my character’s transformation. I had fun dropping some clues here and there – a nuclear disaster, as a clin d’oeil to the science fiction novels I read when I was a teenager ; or the mere way men look at her, as a unique case of suggestion (the excellent Swedish title is a play on word : “Suggestioner”, “sug” meaning sow, if my memory is correct (Nordstet Forlag ed). Or maybe it was caused by eating disorder pushed to a limit ; or anger ; or desire ; or “the stress of needing to achieve perfection in order to please” – excellent reason. But none of these reasons is the reason : it just HAPPENS.

To me the last sentence is fundamental. When I wrote it I knew the book was over. I never know when the book will end until I write the last sentence : I “hear” it’s the last one. It makes a certain sound. All I know for that sentence is that all my characters, in all my books, have a very strong feeling of “standing on the Earth” (être debout sur la Terre).

Some of the “truisms” intoxicating her mind are racist truisms (and sexist truisms). In the beginning she keeps repeating those stupidities, then she gets rid of them little by little, as she finds her own voice in her own body. I never thought of her as “banished food” but the book was translated in Arabic only 2 years ago (Syria) and I’m not even sure it got distributed. (while “Le Pays” was distributed). It took ten years to find an Arabic publisher for “Pig tales”, though the book was translated everywhere else. A first attempt failed in Lebanon, then a second one in Egypt… because of the shyness of the French woman directing the French institute at that time : “too pornographic” she said.

For the paragraphs, again I was following my instinct. But maybe she thinks as she eats : compulsively.

I was hooked on Pig Tales from the very first chapter. I was intrigued about how this transformation into a pig would happen. I found it very interesting how the narrator remarked about being called “wholesome” by both her boyfriend and her customers. Although she mentioned how attractive she was, it seemed like “wholesome” meant more to her.

I enjoyed all of the foreshadowing to becoming a pig that occurred throughout the novel. On page 14 it said, “But the client kept me tied up the whole weekend”. This can be taken as a metaphor or sexually. This is one of the many examples of sentences that compare human sexual tendencies to animals.

The part where the old woman died was very significant to me while reading the book. This woman was the one person who really seemed to understand her and care about how she was doing. Her transformation became much more drastic after this woman was gone.

When Honore takes her to Aqualand, he embarrasses her in public when she cannot fit into the new swim suit he bought her. He then allows the children there to do the same. I think this reinforces some of the other comments discussed about everyone being a pig.

Thank you for your message.

When I was writing the novel I was very aware of the "surprise" it involved : I distilled details until the reader discovers the transformation. But the book became an "instant best seller" and all the articles told what was going on, that it was about a sow, etc. Of course I couldn't complain about that, but "l'horizon de lecture" [the reading's horizon] was completely different and my little suspense couldn't work on the same basis. I always have a certain tenderness for completely innocent readers, occasional readers for example, who buy it in an airport and get struck by the story. I sometimes get letters of those readers and it's fun.

But good surprises happen even when the reader already knows, because readings add something to the book : I never really thought of your interpretation as "being tied up" referring to an animal (a leash). I wrote it as a suggestion of a sadistic relationship without going into the details, in her naive way of telling the most horrible things very bluntly, as if they were the most common things in the world (comme si elles allaient de soi). But yes, you're completely right.

The old woman may have been written in parallel with the African marabout character : those two are the only ones who show a little bit of understanding at some point. She's a maternal figure. In my memory she doesn't get transformed (she dies before), while the marabout looks like an elephant due to his skin treatment (and Edgar like a horse - I can't remember). Not everybody is a pig but everyone is threatened by metamorphosis. The world is not stable (instable) and it's both scary and delightful, see Ovid�

First off, I would like to extend a huge thank-you to Marie Darrieussecq for participating with us on the forum and to Professors Mandel and Durand, for providing us all, the invaluable opportunity for such in-depth discussions and debate to take place on important contemporary issues between young minds.

I was floored by this novel to the point where it was necessary for me to re-read it before I attempted to post anything of substance on the many, many thoughts and emotions it had evoked within me. Darriessecq has previously responded to the forum that during her 10 hour days of writing for this novel, the main character never left her, that she lived with her for six weeks, incessantly. This served my second read by allowing to specifically focus more of my attention to the ways in which the character is authorizing herself in the text, since it was evident that the author had went through a similar process when creating the main character of Pig Tales.

This is the first book that I have read, that embodies the complexities of modern woman-hood truthfully and in a powerful way: the daily struggle between hating and loving how you look, using sex as a catalyst for control, love, and money, while also engaging its functions of fulfillment and destruction; honestly illuminating how often the distinction between those roles become blurred and most importantly I think, how the Cinderella ideals have failed an entire generation of woman –devolving many of us, as a result, into confused subordinates with bi-polar sexual appetites in a very un-fairy land.

The novel’s transitions to and from acceptable interpretations of reality was très intéressant! The speaker treated certain taboo social truisms, like those involving/alluding to sex and violence (often one in the same), differently throughout the text. For instance, the idea of violence coinciding with a party atmosphere is easily accepted by the characters as extravagant normalcy (the scenes at Aqualand and Edgar’s) as they bear no apology, along with their graphic re-tellings from the speaker. She is more often apologizing when alluding to taboos, on page 26, “…and once again I beg any impressionable readers to skip these pages. Bluntly put, I began really wanting sex.”

But no such signs of caution for the midnight party scene that ends in a matter of fact, “Fortunately for me there was a girl strung up to a chandelier by her hair who was making even more of a racket. Her insides were hanging out, bowels and all –they’d had a fine time with her.” For an anarchist like me, I’m always slightly depressed after a tale of idealistic chaos doesn’t go as well as everyone would’ve hoped (see: Dicaprio in The Beach) – this book was able to put the idealisms on hold, and gave me to have a chance to view a public de-evolution (which I fear, readily) in the raw.

Marie, if I may ask, in a novel that deals so heavily with elements of social/moral decay –in an offensive public reality, I suspect you lived through along with your character from reading your comments – were you able to find any beauty amid the dark?

Et aussi naturellement, merci pour la bonne lecture!

What a passionate reading ! You quote the "worst" part I think (the orgy, the chandelier girl...). At that point of the novel, the character got used to what she sees, nothing surprises her anymore (if something has ever really surprised her).

Beauty, yes, I found some beauty in that world : I loved to describe the ruins of Paris (one of my favorite films is Chris Marker's La jetée, where you can see black and white pictures of Paris after a nuclear disaster), I loved to write the scenes of lycantrophy (werewolf transformation)- Yvan is a really beautiful male... I loved to "eat" chestnuts with her, and I just cherish her, sentimentally, as a character that exists without me anymore. She changed my life, after all...

The tone of her voice made it : that little "song" of her, like a humming I had in my mind while I was writing : almost like a nursery rhyme, and on that musical line I could write everything including terrible things - a terrible world. It was distanced by the irony of the contrast : her naive voice, and the things she said.

What's ironic too on that forum is those adds you may get too, on your side of the Internet ocean, of those gorgeous Russian girls that are not sold here to get married, I'm afraid !

Okay. I mean, it starts out, and she's this "wholesome" woman. A sex worker. It's a suiting combination because Johns aren't inclined to think they're doing anything wrong. Rather, they'd prefer believing that their sexual pursuits are healthy. A "wholesome" chick makes that delusion more attainable. Thus her original popularity, and her (profession) downfall upon (personal) descent.

Now, like. Of course there's symbolism, duh. We have a typical woman, she could be representative of many people, etc. Her body starts to change, sometimes it's good sometimes it's bad. Her reception by society changes. And again, sometimes it's good, sometimes it's bad.

There is, however, a constant throughout all of these physical and perceptual changes - her lack of control; from the word go, she is at the mercy of wheels whose motion is seemingly predetermined - her experience in life pretty much trifling. Just a ripple in the sea of fate.

So back to this symbolism thing. When this chick's a pig, it just means that she's an individual without autonomy. She is unable to control the course of her own life, and as a result, her life is insignificant (like a pig's).

There's also another issue at play here: Feminism. Her job as a sex worker, and her self image (pig) are symbolic of women's place in society, as well as how they feel about being there. It's an extreme example, but an exaggeration by no means.

The book even starts out with an apologetic tone; nothing says Subservient Woman more than "please forgive me."

When she's a pig, this is not her "accepting her body for what it is!" The freedom she experiences as a pig represents the freedom you'll experience in ignoring your own Will in submission to society. Of course it's easier to float with the current, but true humanity comes from forging your own path.

Just an aside: I recently found out (first hand...) that "Boutiques" of this nature do exist. They do employ women whose personal image is shit because of their work. And they do distribute drugs to clients, all under the guise of legitimate business. It's not too cool.

They are also called "massage parlors" which the police had been trying to crack down on over the past few years. Supposedly.

What really stuck out to me in reading this novel was the distinct arc of the main character, and the way she changes with the society she lives in. Aside from the pig metamorphosis, she is steadily angrier as the book continues as she loses those who were supposed to be pillars for her. The old woman in the beginning of the book, Honore, the loss of Yvan and finally the betrayal of her mother, are all points in the book where people she cared for were taken or left her.

I thought it was extremely interesting how the distopic society was casually, gradually introduced. Marie Darrieusecq mentioned that she enveloped herself into the character, and that in some ways she wasn't intending any specific message. I wonder if the chaotic government and ruined landscape of France developed gradually in the book, or if it was an idea lingering in the back of her head, waiting to be implemented. It was very skillfully done, by the way.

How I was reading it, I thought all of the perfumes and creams and boutique products were part of how she became a pig in a literal sense within the story. Specifically the perfume Moonlight Madness, because Yvan, the owner (creator?) of the product became a werewolf, and also in the party scene, the main character mentions that the party-goers smelled strongly of that perfume, among others.

"Everyone yelled and I wondered if it was the end of the world or something, but they all hugged and kissed one another, and I wound up covered with lipstick: Yerling, Gilda, and Moonlight madness, too---nothing trashy about this crowd" (105).

I found it interesting how she says they are not trashy, as if they are more civilized or sophisticated, and yet victimize people for amusement in brutal ways. It fits with other interpretations as everyone else being animals too, and I felt like the beauty products had something to do with. It may act as a commentary on how people use products to cover up the imperfections or ugliness of themselves, in order to appear as refined as possible (and not an animal). In the end though, it doesn't work at all, and only enhances the contrast between what we want to be, and what we are.

A short reaction to this interesting remarks from Astrid. One is always supposed to "kill the father", in an oedipian way, but this character kills her mother - she has no choice, in the logic of the narration. She has to do it to be herself - she's at the border of species : neither human, nor animal. So she can't have parents, she chooses her own destiny and even her own body. She owes nothing to genetics, to family : she's herself, she's free. In the story it involves violence. More violence than cosmetics !

Merci pour votre message. Your analysis of her being "wholesome" thus suiting the clients is OK. And apologizing for being what she is - even when she doesn't have any idea of what she is, et pour cause.

I was also getting bored (in 1995) with the obsession for hygiene, not smoking, eating organic stuff, etc. A wholesome world (un monde sain) would be a fascist utopia (see the character of Edgar). When you declare this is wholesome (clean, pure) and this is not (dirty, weird) it gets dangerous. Because it can be applied to absolutely everything.

I'm not sure of the equation pig / lack of control / bad / sex /animal on one side ; and human / reason / control / good / eroticism / not animal. Not that you exactly say that, but there's always been a tendency to read the book that way.

The book fluctuates. At the end of the book she is completely a sow ( a fulfilled sow, une truie réussie, épanouie), and she's clever, strong, independent. She THINKS. I didn't write a pamphlet, I wrote a novel. What I know is that she's always at the margin of something.

Thank you for your response. This is the first contact I've had with an author, and it's quite intriguing.

And actually, I was proposing an equation like the one you mentioned. It still attracts me because of the logic, but your persistence in ambivalence and noncommittal potential leaves me with a lot to think about.

I like how you have created a character and let her come through you, rather than simply calculating the proper particulars to realize predetermined themes. In taking this approach you have left the door open for discussion, and that is why I look forward to tomorrow's class...