Enduring Love

Enduring Love

by Ian McEwan


$14.36 $15.95 Save 10% Current price is $14.36, Original price is $15.95. You Save 10%.
View All Available Formats & Editions
Eligible for FREE SHIPPING
  • Want it by Thursday, September 27  Order now and choose Expedited Shipping during checkout.


Enduring Love by Ian McEwan

The calm, organized life of science writer Joe Rose is shattered when he sees a man die in a freak hot-air balloon accident. A stranger named Jed Parry joins Rose in helping to bring the balloon to safety, but unknown to Rose, something passes between Parry and himself on that day—something that gives birth to an obsession in Parry so powerful that it will test the limits of Rose's beloved rationalism, threaten the love of his wife, Clarissa, and drive him to the brink of murder and madness. From the Booker Prize-winning author of Atonement, here is a brilliant and compassionate novel of love, faith, and suspense, and of how life can change in an instant.

Product Details

ISBN-13: 9780385494144
Publisher: Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group
Publication date: 12/28/1998
Edition description: Reprint
Pages: 272
Sales rank: 201,337
Product dimensions: 7.96(w) x 5.14(h) x 0.76(d)

About the Author

Ian McEwan is the bestselling author of seventeen books, including the novels NutshellThe Children ActSweet ToothSolar, winner of the Bollinger Everyman Wodehouse Prize; On Chesil BeachSaturdayAtonement, winner of the National Book Critics Circle Award and the W. H. Smith Literary Award; The Comfort of Strangers and Black Dogs, both short-listed for the Booker Prize; Amsterdam, winner of the Booker Prize; and The Child in Time, winner of the Whitbread Award; as well as the story collections First Love, Last Rites, winner of the Somerset Maugham Award, and In Between the Sheets.


Oxford, England

Date of Birth:

June 21, 1948

Place of Birth:

Aldershot, England


B.A., University of Sussex, 1970; M.A., University of East Anglia, 1971

Read an Excerpt


The beginning is simple to mark. We were in sunlight under a turkey oak, partly protected from a strong, gusty wind. I was kneeling on the grass with a corkscrew in my hand, and Clarissa was passing me the bottle—a 1987 Daumas Gassac. This was the moment, this was the pinprick on the time map: I was stretching out my hand, and as the cool neck and the black foil touched my palm, we heard a man's shout. We turned to look across the field and saw the danger. Next thing, I was running toward it. The transformation was absolute: I don't recall dropping the corkscrew, or getting to my feet, or making a decision, or hearing the caution Clarissa called after me. What idiocy, to be racing into this story and its labyrinths, sprinting away from our happiness among the fresh spring grasses by the oak. There was the shout again, and a child's cry, enfeebled by the wind that roared in the tall trees along the hedgerows. I ran faster. And there, suddenly, from different points around the field, four other men were conver ging on the scene, running like me.

I see us from two hundred feet up, through the eyes of the buzzard we had watched earlier, soaring, circling, and dipping in the tumult of currents: five men running silently toward the center of a hundred-acre field. I approached from the southeast, with the wind at my back. About two hundred yards to my left two men ran side by side. They were farm laborers who had been repairing the fence along the field's southern edge where it skirts the road. The same distance beyond them was the motorist, John Logan, whose car was banked on the grass verge with its door, or doors, wide open. Knowing what I know now, it's odd to evoke the figure of Jed Parry directly ahead of me, emerging from a line of beeches on the far side of the field a quarter of a mile away, running into the wind. To the buzzard, Parry and I were tiny forms, our white shirts brilliant against the green, rushing toward each other like lovers, innocent of the grief this entanglement would bring. The encounter that would unhinge us was minutes away,
its enormity disguised from us not only by the barrier of time but by the colossus in the center of the field, which drew us in with the power of a terrible ratio that set fabulous magnitude against the puny human distress at its base.

What was Clarissa doing? She said she walked quickly toward the center of the field. I don't know how she resisted the urge to run. By the time it happened, the event I am about to describe—the fall—she had almost caught us up and was well placed as an observer, unencumbered by participation, by the ropes and the shouting, and by our fatal lack of cooperation. What I describe is shaped by what Clarissa saw too, by what we told each other in the time of obsessive reexamination that followed: the aftermath, an appropriate term for what happened in a field waiting for its early summer mowing. The aftermath, the second crop, the growth promoted by that first cut in May.

I'm holding back, delaying the information. I'm lingering in the prior moment because it was a time when other outcomes were still possible; the convergence of six figures in a flat green space has a comforting geometry from the buzzard's perspective, the knowable, limited plane of the snooker table. The initial conditions, the force and the direction of the force, define all the consequent pathways, all the angles of collision and return, and the glow of the overhead light bathes the field, the baize and all its moving bodies, in reassuring clarity. I think that while we were still converging, before we made contact, we were in a state of mathematical grace. I linger on our dispositions, the relative distances and the compass point—because as far as these occurrences were concerned, this was the last time I understood anything clearly at all.

What were we running toward? I don't think any of us would ever know fully. But superficially the answer was a balloon. Not the nominal space that encloses a cartoon character's speech or thought, or, by analogy, the kind that's driven by mere hot air. It was an enormous balloon filled with helium, that elemental gas forged from hydrogen in the nuclear furnace of the stars, first step along the way in the generation of multiplicity and variety of matter in the universe, including our selves and all our thoughts.

We were running toward a catastrophe, which itself was a kind of furnace in whose heat identities and fates would buckle into new shapes. At the base of the balloon was a basket in which there was a boy, and by the basket, clinging to a rope, was a man in need of help.

Even without the balloon the day would have been marked for memory, though in the most pleasurable of ways, for this was a reunion after a separation of six weeks, the longest Clarissa and I had spent apart in our seven years. On the way out to Heathrow I had made a detour into Covent Garden and found a semilegal place to park, near Carluccio's. I went in and put together a picnic whose centerpiece was a great ball of mozzarella, which the assistant fished out of an earthenware vat with a wooden claw. I also bought black olives, mixed salad, and focaccia. Then I hurried up Long Acre to Bertram Rota's to take delivery of Clarissa's birthday present. Apart from the flat and our car, it was the most expensive single item I had ever bought. The rarity of this little book seemed to give off a heat I could feel through the thick brown wrapping paper as I walked back up the street.

Forty minutes later I was scanning the screens for arrival information. The Boston flight had only just landed and I guessed I had a half-hour wait. If one ever wanted proof of Darwin's contention that the many expressions of emotion in humans are universal, genetically inscribed, then a few minutes by the arrivals gate in Heathrow's Terminal Four should suffice. I saw the same joy, the same uncontrollable smile, in the faces of a Nigerian earth mama, a thin-lipped Scottish granny, and a pale, correct Japanese businessman as they wheeled their trolleys in and recognized a figure in the expectant crowd. Observing human variety can give pleasure, but so too can human sameness. I kept hearing the same sighing sound on a downward note, often breathed through a name as two people pressed forward to go into their embrace. Was it a major second or a minor third, or somewhere in between? Pa-pa! Yolan-ta! Ho-bi! Nz-e! There was also a rising note, crooned into the solemn, wary faces of babies by long-absent fathers or grandparents, cajoling, beseeching an immediate return of love. Han-nah? Tom-ee? Let me in!

The variety was in the private dramas: a father and a teenage son, Turkish perhaps, stood in a long silent clinch, forgiving each other, or mourning a loss, oblivious to the baggage trolleys jamming around them; identical twins, women in their fifties, greeted each other with clear distaste, just touching hands and kissing without making contact; a small American boy, hoisted onto the shoulders of a father he did not recognize, screamed to be put down, provoking a fit of temper in his tired mother.

But mostly it was smiles and hugs, and in thirty-five minutes I experienced more than fifty theatrical happy endings, each one with the appearance of being slightly less well acted than the one before, until I began to feel emotionally exhausted and suspected that even the children were being insincere. I was just wondering how convincing I myself could be now in greeting Clarissa when she tapped me on the shoulder, having missed me in the crowd and circled round. Immediately my detachment vanished, and I called out her name, in tune with all the rest.

Less than an hour later we were parked by a track that ran through beech woods in the Chiltern Hills, near Christmas Common. While Clarissa changed her shoes I loaded a backpack with our picnic. We set off down our path arm in arm, still elated by our reunion; what was familiar about her—the size and feel of her hand, the warmth and tranquillity in her voice, the Celt's pale skin and green eyes—was also novel, gleaming in an alien light, reminding me of our very first meetings and the months we spent falling in love. Or, I imagined, I was another man, my own sexual competitor, come to steal her from me. When I told her, she laughed and said I was the world's most complicated simpleton, and it was while we stopped to kiss and wondered aloud whether we should not have driven straight home to bed that we glimpsed through the fresh foliage the helium balloon drifting dreamily across the wooded valley to our west. Neither the man nor the boy was visible to us. I remember thinking, but not saying, that it was a p recarious form of transport when the wind rather than the pilot set the course. Then I thought that perhaps this was the very nature of its attraction. And instantly the idea went out of my mind.

We went through College Wood toward Pishill, stopping to admire the new greenery on the beeches. Each leaf seemed to glow with an internal light. We talked about the purity of this color, the beech leaf in spring, and how looking at it cleared the mind. As we walked into the wood the wind began to get up and the branches creaked like rusted machinery. We knew this route well. This was surely the finest landscape within an hour of central London. I loved the pitch and roll of the fields and their scatterings of chalk and flint, and the paths that dipped across them to sink into the darkness of the beech stands, certain neglected, badly drained valleys where thick iridescent mosses covered the rotting tree trunks and where you occasionally glimpsed a muntjak blundering through the undergrowth.

For much of the time as we walked westward we were talking about Clarissa's research—John Keats dying in Rome in the house at the foot of the Spanish Steps where he lodged with his friend, Joseph Severn. Was it possible there were still three or four unpublished letters of Keats's in existence? Might one of them be addressed to Fanny Brawne? Clarissa had reason to think so and had spent part of a sabbatical term traveling around Spain and Portugal, visiting houses known to Fanny Brawne and to Keats's sister Fanny. Now she was back from Boston, where she had been working in the Houghton Library at Harvard, trying to trace correspondence from Severn's remote family connections. Keats's last known letter was written almost three months before he died, to his old friend Charles Brown. It's rather stately in tone and typical in throwing out, almost as parenthesis, a brilliant description of artistic creation: "the knowledge of contrast, feeling for light and shade, all that information (primitive sense) necessary for a poem, are great enemies to the recovery of the stomach." It's the one with the famous farewell, so piercing in its reticence and courtesy: "I can scarcely bid you goodbye, even in a letter. I always made an awkward bow. God bless you! John Keats." But all the biographies agree that Keats was in remission from tuberculosis when he wrote this letter, and remained so for a further ten days. He visited the Villa Borghese and strolled down the Corso. He listened with pleasure to Severn playing Haydn, he mischievously tipped his dinner out the window in protest at the quality of the cooking, and he even thought about starting a poem. If letters existed from this period, why would Severn or, more likely, Brown have wanted to suppress them? Clarissa thought she had found the answer in a couple of references in correspondence between distant relations of Brown's written in the 1840s, but she needed more evidence, different sources.

"He knew he'd never see Fanny again," Clarissa said. "He wrote to Brown and said that to see her name written would be more than he could bear. But he never stopped thinking about her. He was strong enough those days in December, and he loved her so much. It's easy to imagine him writing a letter he never intended to send."

I squeezed her hand and said nothing. I knew little about Keats or his poetry, but I thought it possible that in his hopeless situation, he would not have wanted to write precisely because he loved her so much. Lately I'd had the idea that Clarissa's interest in these hypothetical letters had something to do with our own situation, and with her conviction that love that did not find its expression in a letter was not perfect. In the months after we met and before we bought the apartment, she had written me some beauties, passionately abstract in their exploration of the ways our love was different from and superior to any that had ever existed. Perhaps that's the essence of a love letter, to celebrate the unique. I had tried to match hers, but all that sincerity would permit me were the facts, and they seemed miraculous enough to me: a beautiful woman loved and wanted to be loved by a large, clumsy, balding fellow who could hardly believe his luck.

We stopped to watch the buzzard as we were approaching Maidensgrove. The balloon may have recrossed our path while we were in the woods that cover the valleys around the nature reserve. By the early afternoon we were on the Ridgeway Path, walking north along the line of the escarpment. Then we struck out along one of those broad fingers of land that project westward from the Chilterns into the rich farmland below. Across the Vale of Oxford we could make out the outlines of the Cotswold Hills and beyond them, perhaps, the Brecon Beacons rising in a faint blue mass. Our plan had been to picnic right out on the end, where the view was best, but the wind was too strong by now. We went back across the field and sheltered among the oaks along the northern side. And it was because of these trees that we did not see the balloon's descent. Later I wondered why it had not been blown miles away. Later still I discovered that the wind at five hundred feet was not the same that day as the wind at ground level.

The Keats conversation faded as we unpacked our lunch. Clarissa pulled the bottle from the bag and held it by its base as she offered it to me. As I have said, the neck touched my palm as we heard the shout. It was a baritone, on a rising note of fear. It marked the beginning and, of course, an end. At that moment a chapter—no, a whole stage—of my life closed. Had I known, and had there been a spare second or two, I might have allowed myself a little nostalgia. We were seven years into a childless marriage of love. Clarissa Mellon was also in love with another man, but with his two hundredth birthday coming up, he was little trouble. In fact, he helped in the combative exchanges that were part of our equilibrium, our way of talking about work. We lived in an art deco apartment block in North London with a below-average share of worries—a money shortage for a year or so, an unsubstantiated cancer scare, the divorces and illnesses of friends, Clarissa's irritation with my occasional and manic bouts of dissat isfaction with my kind of work—but there was nothing that threatened our free and intimate existence.

What we saw when we stood from our picnic was this: a huge gray balloon, the size of a house, the shape of a teardrop, had come down in the field. The pilot must have been halfway out of the passenger basket as it touched the ground. His leg had become entangled in a rope that was attached to an anchor. Now, as the wind gusted and pushed and lifted the balloon toward the escarpment, he was being half dragged, half carried across the field. In the basket was a child, a boy of about ten. In a sudden lull, the man was on his feet, clutching at the basket, or at the boy. Then there was another gust, and the pilot was on his back, bumping over the rough ground, trying to dig his feet in for purchase or lunging for the anchor behind him in order to secure it in the earth. Even if he had been able, he would not have dared disentangle himself from the anchor rope. He needed his weight to keep the balloon on the ground, and the wind could have snatched the rope from his hands.

As I ran I heard him shouting at the boy, urging him to leap clear of the basket. But the boy was tossed from one side to another as the balloon lurched across the field. He regained his balance and got a leg over the edge of the basket. The balloon rose and fell, thumping into a hummock, and the boy dropped backward out of sight. Then he was up again, arms stretched out toward the man and shouting something in return—words or inarticulate fear, I couldn't tell.

I must have been a hundred yards away when the situation came under control. The wind had dropped; the man was on his feet, bending over the anchor as he drove it into the ground. He had unlooped the rope from his leg. For some reason—complacency, exhaustion, or simply because he was doing what he was told—the boy remained where he was. The towering balloon wavered and tilted and tugged, but the beast was tamed. I slowed my pace, though I did not stop. As the man straightened, he saw us—or at least the farmworkers and me—and he waved us on. He still needed help, but I was glad to slow to a brisk walk. The farm laborers were also walking now. One of them was coughing loudly. But the man with the car, John Logan, knew something we didn't and kept on running. As for Jed Parry, my view of him was blocked by the balloon that lay between us.

The wind renewed its rage in the treetops just before I felt its force on my back. Then it struck the balloon, which ceased its innocent, comical wagging and was suddenly stilled. Its only motion was a shimmer of strain that rippled out across its ridged surface as the contained energy accumulated. It broke free, the anchor flew up in a spray of dirt, and balloon and basket rose ten feet in the air. The boy was thrown back, out of sight. The pilot had the rope in his hands and was lifted two feet clear off the ground. If Logan had not reached him and taken hold of one of the many dangling lines, the balloon would have carried the boy away. Instead, both men were now being pulled across the field, and the farmworkers and I were running again.

I got there before them. When I took a rope, the basket was above head height. The boy inside it was screaming. Despite the wind, I caught the smell of urine. Jed Parry was on a rope seconds after me, and the two farmworkers, Joseph Lacey and Toby Greene, caught hold just after him. Greene was having a coughing fit, but he kept his grip. The pilot was shouting instructions at us, but too frantically, and no one was listening. He had been struggling too long, and now he was exhausted and emotionally out of control. With five of us on the lines the balloon was secured. We simply had to keep steady on our feet and pull hand over hand to bring the basket down, and this, despite whatever the pilot was shouting, was what we began to do.

By this time we were standing on the escarpment. The ground dropped away sharply at a gradient of about twenty-five percent and then leveled out into a gentle slope toward the bottom. In winter this is a favorite tobogganing spot for local kids. We were all talking at once. Two of us, myself and the motorist, wanted to walk the balloon away from the edge. Someone thought the priority was to get the boy out. Someone else was calling for the balloon to be pulled down so that we could anchor it firmly. I saw no contradiction, for we could be pulling the balloon down as we moved back into the field. But the second opinion was prevailing. The pilot had a fourth idea, but no one knew or cared what it was.

I should make something clear. There may have been a vague communality of purpose, but we were never a team. There was no chance, no time. Coincidences of time and place, a predisposition to help, had brought us together under the balloon. No one was in charge—or everyone was, and we were in a shouting match. The pilot, red-faced, bawling, and sweating, we ignored. Incompetence came off him like heat. But we were beginning to bawl our own instructions too. I know that if I had been uncontested leader, the tragedy would not have happened. Later I heard some of the others say the same thing about themselves. But there was not time, no opportunity for force of character to show. Any leader, any firm plan, would have been preferable to none. No human society, from the hunter-gatherer to the postindustrial, has come to the attention of anthropologists that did not have its leaders and the led; and no emergency was ever dealt with effectively by democratic process.

It was not so difficult to bring the passenger basket down low enough for us to see inside. We had a new problem. The boy was curled up on the floor. His arms covered his face and he was gripping his hair tightly. "What's his name?" we said to the red-faced man.


"Harry!" we shouted. "Come on, Harry. Harry! Take my hand, Harry. Get out of there, Harry!"

But Harry curled up tighter. He flinched each time we said his name. Our words were like stones thrown down at his body. He was in paralysis of will, a state known as learned helplessness, often noted in laboratory animals subjected to unusual stress; all impulses to problem-solving disappear, all instinct for survival drains away. We pulled the basket down to the ground and managed to keep it there, and we were just leaning in to try and lift the boy out when the pilot shouldered us aside and attempted to climb in. He said later that he told us what he was trying to do. We heard nothing for our own shouting and swearing. What he was doing seemed ridiculous, but his intentions, it turned out, were completely sensible. He wanted to deflate the balloon by pulling a cord that was tangled in the basket.

"Yer great pillock!" Lacey shouted. "Help us reach the lad out."

I heard what was coming two seconds before it reached us. It was as though an express train were traversing the treetops, hurtling toward us. An airy, whining, whooshing sound grew to full volume in half a second. At the inquest, the Met office figures for wind speeds that day were part of the evidence, and there were some gusts, it was said, of seventy miles an hour. This must have been one, but before I let it reach us, let me freeze the frame—there's a security in stillness—to describe our circle.

To my right the ground dropped away. Immediately to my left was John Logan, a family doctor from Oxford, forty-two years old, married to a historian, with two children. He was not the youngest of our group, but he was the fittest. He played tennis to county level and belonged to a mountaineering club. He had done a stint with a mountain rescue team in the western Highlands. Logan was a mild, reticent man, apparently, otherwise he might have been able to force himself usefully on us as a leader. To his left was Joseph Lacey, sixty-three, farm laborer, odd-job man, captain of his local bowls team. He lived with his wife in Watlington, a small town at the foot of the escarpment. On his left was his mate, Toby Greene, fifty-eight, also a farm laborer, unmarried, living with his mother at Russell's Water. Both men worked for the Stonor estate. Greene was the one with the smoker's cough. Next around the circle, trying to get into the basket, was the pilot, James Gadd, fifty-five, an executive in a small advertising company who lived in Reading with his wife and one of their grownup children, who was mentally handicapped. At the inquest, Gadd was found to have breached half a dozen basic safety procedures, which the coroner listed tonelessly. Gadd's ballooning license was withdrawn. The boy in the basket was Harry Gadd, his grandson, ten years old, from Camberwell, London. Facing me, with the ground sloping away to his left, was Jed Parry. He was twenty-eight, unemployed, living on an inheritance in Hampstead.

This was the crew. As far as we were concerned, the pilot had abdicated his authority. We were breathless, excited, determined on our separate plans, while the boy was beyond participating in his own survival. He lay in a heap, blocking out the world with his forearms. Lacey, Greene, and I were attempting to fish him out, and now Gadd was climbing over the top of us. Logan and Parry were calling out their own suggestions. Gadd had placed one foot by his grandson's head and Greene was cussing him when it happened. A mighty fist socked the balloon in two rapid blows, one-two, the second more vicious than the first. And the first was vicious. It jerked Gadd right out of the basket onto the ground, and it lifted the balloon five feet or so, straight into the air. Gadd's considerable weight was removed from the equation. The rope ran through my grip, scorching my palms, but I managed to keep hold, with two feet of line spare. The others kept hold too. The basket was right above our heads now, and we stood with arm s upraised like Sunday bell ringers. Into our amazed silence, before the shouting could resume, the second punch came and knocked the balloon up and westward. Suddenly we were treading the air with all our weight in the grip of our fists.

Those one or two ungrounded seconds occupy as much space in memory as might a long journey up an uncharted river. My first impulse was to hang on in order to keep the balloon weighted down. The child was incapable, and was about to be borne away. Two miles to the west were high-voltage power lines. A child alone and needing help. It was my duty to hang on, and I thought we would all do the same.

Almost simultaneous with the desire to stay on the rope and save the boy, barely a neuronal pulse later, came other thoughts, in which fear and instant calculations of logarithmic complexity were fused. We were rising, and the ground was dropping away as the balloon was pushed westward. I knew I had to get my legs and feet locked around the rope. But the end of the line barely reached below my waist, and my grip was slipping. My legs flailed in the empty air. Every fraction of a second that passed increased the drop, and the point must come when to let go would be impossible or fatal. And compared with me, Harry was safe, curled up in the basket. The balloon might well come down safely at the bottom of the hill. And perhaps my impulse to hang on was nothing more than a continuation of what I had been attempting moments before, simply a failure to adjust quickly.

And again, less than one adrenally incensed heartbeat later, another variable was added to the equation: someone let go, and the balloon and its hangers-on lurched upward another several feet.

I didn't know, nor have I ever discovered, who let go first. I'm not prepared to accept that it was me. But everyone claims not to have been first. What is certain is that if we had not broken ranks, our collective weight would have brought the balloon to earth a quarter of the way down the slope as the gust subsided a few seconds later. But as I've said, there was no team, there was no plan, no agreement to be broken. No failure. So can we accept that it was right, every man for himself? Were we all happy afterward that this was a reasonable course? We never had that comfort, for there was a deeper covenant, ancient and automatic, written in our nature. Cooperation—the basis of our earliest hunting successes, the force behind our evolving capacity for language, the glue of our social cohesion. Our misery in the aftermath was proof that we knew we had failed ourselves. But letting go was in our nature too. Selfishness is also written on our hearts. This is our mammalian conflict: what to give to the others a nd what to keep for yourself. Treading that line, keeping the others in check and being kept in check by them, is what we call morality. Hanging a few feet above the Chilterns escarpment, our crew enacted morality's ancient, irresolvable dilemma: us, or me.

Someone said me, and then there was nothing to be gained by saying us. Mostly, we are good when it makes sense. A good society is one that makes sense of being good. Suddenly, hanging there below the basket, we were a bad society, we were disintegrating. Suddenly the sensible choice was to look out for yourself. The child was not my child, and I was not going to die for it. The moment I glimpsed a body falling away—but whose?—and I felt the balloon lurch upward, the matter was settled; altruism had no place. Being good made no sense. I let go and fell, I reckon, about twelve feet. I landed heavily on my side; I got away with a bruised thigh. Around me—before or after, I'm not so sure—bodies were thumping to the ground. Jed Parry was unhurt. Toby Greene broke his ankle. Joseph Lacey, the oldest, who had done his National Service with a paratroop regiment, did no more than wind himself.

By the time I got to my feet, the balloon was fifty yards away and one man was still dangling by his rope. In John Logan, husband, father, doctor, and mountain rescue worker, the flame of altruism must have burned a little stronger. It didn't need much. When four of us let go, the balloon, with six hundred pounds shed, must have surged upward. A delay of one second would have been enough to close his options. When I stood up and saw him, he was a hundred feet up and rising, just where the ground itself was falling. He wasn't struggling, he wasn't kicking or trying to claw his way up. He hung perfectly still along the line of the rope, all his energies concentrated in his weakening grip. He was already a tiny figure, almost black against the sky. There was no sight of the boy. The balloon and its basket lifted away and westward, and the smaller Logan became, the more terrible it was, so terrible it was funny, it was a stunt, a joke, a cartoon, and a frightened laugh heaved out of my chest. For this was prepost erous, the kind of thing that happened to Bugs Bunny or Tom or Jerry, and for an instant I thought it wasn't true, and that only I could see right through the joke, and that my utter disbelief would set reality straight and see Dr. Logan safely to the ground.

I don't know whether the others were standing or sprawling. Toby Greene was probably doubled up over his ankle. But I do remember the silence into which I laughed. No exclamations, no shouted instructions as before. Mute helplessness. He was two hundred yards away now, and perhaps three hundred feet above the ground. Our silence was a kind of acceptance, a death warrant. Or it was horrified shame, because the wind had dropped, and barely stirred against our backs. He had been on the rope so long that I began to think he might stay there until the balloon drifted down or the boy came to his senses and found the valve that released the gas, or until some beam, or god, or some other impossible cartoon thing, came and gathered him up. Even as I had that hope, we saw him slip down right to the end of the rope. And still he hung there. For two seconds, three, four. And then he let go. Even then, there was a fraction of time when he barely fell, and I still thought there was a chance that a freak physical law, a fur ious thermal, some phenomenon no more astonishing than the one we were witnessing, would intervene and bear him up. We watched him drop. You could see the acceleration. No forgiveness, no special dispensation for flesh, or bravery, or kindness. Only ruthless gravity. And from somewhere, perhaps from him, perhaps from some indifferent crow, a thin squawk cut through the stilled air. He fell as he had hung, a stiff little black stick. I've never seen such a terrible thing as that falling man.

What People are Saying About This

From the Publisher

"A remarkable novel, haunting and original and written in prose that anyone who writes can only envy."
Washington Post

"Impeccably written—[McEwan] is the quietest and most lucid of stylists, with never a word wasted or fumbled."
New York Review of Books

"A timeless tale about the way fate and faith shape our relationships—part existential fable about the human desire to control fate, [Enduring Love] is also, most affectingly, a story about the strength and fragility of married love."

"Eerie, slow-paced suspense worth its weight in caffeine for keeping you up all night."
Entertainment Weekly

"[A] beautifully realized—novel about our responses to violence. It asks us to choose between competing visions of events, and, in the process, forces us to examine the way we react to both art and life when something terrible happens."
Boston Globe

"McEwan's writing—is unflaggingly poised and, as usual, capable of excavating deep, painful trenches in the back corridors of the psyche and the heart."
Miami Herald

"Cleverly imagined, beautifully executed —Mr. McEwan has few peers."
The Wall Street Journal

Reading Group Guide

Ian McEwan's novel Enduring Love showcases the author's range and skill as he delivers unlikely, and welcome, combinations of suspense, ethics, philosophy, and political and religious ideology. In lesser hands, such a mix might be lethal. In McEwan's, it's intoxicating.

1. Which is the enduring love the title refers to?

2. Look carefully at the first chapter and talk about the way in which it holds the promise of the whole novel.

3. The narrator says, "I'm lingering in the prior moment because it was a time when other outcomes were still possible" (page 2). Discuss this as a theme throughout the novel.

4. How does science infuse this story? Discuss the different theories described and explained and their importance to this novel.

5. The author writes of "...morality's ancient, irresolvable dilemma: us, or me" (page 15) in relation to the balloon accident. Does this apply to other situations in the novel as well?

6. Joe describes how Clarissa views the trend in science toward neo-Darwinism, evolutionary psychology, and genetics as "rationalism gone berserk," and adds that she thought "everything was being stripped down...and in the process some larger meaning was lost" (page 75). Discuss this as a theme in the novel.

7. Did you think at the beginning that Joe and Clarissa's relationship would reach the crisis point it did? Did you think that Joe and Clarissa's love would endure? At different points, what made you think so?

8. In chapter nine, the author switches from first-person to third-person point of view, where the reader is in Clarissa's head as imagined by Joe. Talk about this unusual choice. What does it add to your understanding of Joe? Of Clarissa?

9. Did you doubt Joe, as Clarissa and others did? Did the author want you to?

10. In responding to Jean Logan's theory of her husband's tryst, Joe says, "But you can't know this...it's so particular, so elaborate. It's just a hypothesis. You can't let yourself believe in it" (page 132). Discuss the irony of Joe's remembering, moments later, what he's read about de Clerambault's syndrome.

11. At the moment before Clarissa first tells him it's over between them, Joe thinks about love, about how it "generates its own reserves." About how "conflicts, like living organisms, had a natural lifespan" (page 155). Later he notes that "...sustained stress is corrosive of feeling. It's the great deadener" (page 231). In light of what happens in this novel, in what ways is Joe right or wrong about this?

12. In Enduring Love, characters at a police station have faulty memories of events. Talk about the role of unreliable perceptions in this novel.

13. "It's like in banks. You never say money. Or in funeral parlors, no one says dead" (page 205). Though this is not a comic novel, the author uses observational humor throughout. Talk about other examples of humor in the novel.

14. The novel ends with the children and the river. What is the author saying with this choice?

15. In the appendixes, we're reminded (with Jed's letter) that "it is not always easy to accept that one of our most valued experiences may merge into psychopathology" (page 259). Is this true in your experience?

16. Why did the author choose to let us know that Joe and Clarissa reconciled (and adopted a child) with a line in a case study in the appendix?


On Wednesday, February 25th, barnesandnoble.com welcomed Ian McEwan to discuss ENDURING LOVE.

Moderator: Thank you for joining us this evening, Mr. McEwan. Where are joining us from?

Ian McEwan: From Seattle. I'm in the Alexis Hotel. I'm about to go read at Elliot Bay Books, which I think is one of my favorite independent bookstores. I think it was one of those that caught on early on to have coffee in the stores.

Matthew from Cypress Creek, FL: Hello, Mr. McEwan. Is the ballooning accident based on a real event? Thank you.

Ian McEwan: The ballooning accident actually happened in southern Germany about four years ago. A man and his grown-up son were helping to tether a huge zeppelin-type balloon in a high wind. The balloon belonged to a radio station; it was hired for publicity purposes, and both men, father and son, were lifted away from the ground and fell to their deaths. It caused something of a public argument at the time, because a TV station showed footage taken by an amateur video camera, and it was generally felt that this was intrusive and sensationalist. I didn't get the full details of the story till after I had finished the book. A friend had read about it in a paper, but I was never able to locate the clipping. It was only when I was giving a reading in London last year that a young German woman came up to me and filled me in on the details. You'll see that I've adapted the story very much to my own ends.... Those two men become five, and what drew me to the incident was the way in which it dramatizes something about our moral nature. The urge to cooperate, but not at any cost.

Manoj Nair from India: There has been a great change in the themes that you have chosen from that in your first novel, THE CEMENT GARDEN, to BLACK DOGS to ENDURING LOVE now. Can you explain how or why you chose the theme for your novel before going about the act of writing it? Or does the theme develop as you write it? And there is a general feeling that your later books could not match the promise of THE CEMENT GARDEN...

Ian McEwan: I think my works have greatly extended the ambition of THE CEMENT GARDEN. In the early days, perhaps because I didn't know a great deal about the world, I made a virtue of ignorance and concentrated my fiction into very tight and labyrinthine plots. Over the years, I've become interested in retaining many of those features, but at the same time, adding dimensions of history, adding also a world of society with all its contradictions; I also have wanted to extend my emotional range. In some ways, THE CEMENT GARDEN was for me simply a first step.Like most writers, I don't think in terms of themes. The earliest promptings of a novel can be as disparate as a certain kind of voice, an imaginary place that haunts me, a visual detail.

Dennis from Cheyenne, Wyoming: Could you tell us a little bit about how you first learned of de Clerambault's syndrome?

Ian McEwan: I read about it in connection with stalkers, a number of whom suffer from this syndrome. I became intrigued, partly because the condition seems to hold up a distorting mirror to our valued experience of falling in love. I delved into the psychiatric literature, and was both fascinated and appalled: De Clerambault's syndrome is a mental prison. The sufferer believes that a certain person has fallen in love with him (or her) and no evidence to the contrary will shift this conviction.

Liam from New Zealand: I have two questions for you: What are the initial ideas that start a story for you. For instance, do you start with theme, character, plot...? Did you worry about the possible negative reaction your family or friends might have toward you when you wrote THE CEMENT GARDEN or FIRST LOVE, LAST RITES, given their controversial subject matter?

Ian McEwan: I think I've already answered the first part of your question. As for the second, however difficult it might seem, I think it's extremely important to clear your mind of any consideration of the adverse reaction of your family. The most important thing is to be true to your material. Having said that, obviously, you don't want to make any particular person suffer. But still, if people are offended, you have to honor them with the thought that everyone has to take responsibility for their own responses. I think we spend too much time worrying about offense. The real issue is artistic value.

Christophe from Paris, France: I haven't read your novel yet (but intend to very quickly!), and here's my question: without unveiling any secret, it seems that your story is based on true events. The reader is not aware until the final section of your book. Why do you have to mix fiction and reality? Why do you think this technique is necessary to tell a story? According to you, what does it bring to literature in general? In other words Mr. McEwan, why does your inspiration have to feed from news in brief? Bienvous.

Ian McEwan: ENDURING LOVE is pure fiction in that it is not based on any particular event in my life or anyone else's, even though, as I've said, there was a balloon accident in which two men died in southern Germany. It's inevitable, and perhaps necessary, if fiction is to mirror the world in some interesting way, that writers will draw on anything they want -- real or invented. Perhaps there is a real divergence between the Anglo-American traditions on the one hand, and the continental European tradition on the other. In the former tradition, lines between fiction, journalism, and social documentary are often blurred. Perhaps the European tradition values pure invention above all.

Paul from Morris Plains, NJ: I am curious to know what types of changes you make to your book from the English version to the American version? What if any changes did you make to ENDURING LOVE?

Ian McEwan: Nearly all the changes were very minor matters of line-editing concerned with American spellings. One or two phrases that are familiar to an English ear that would seem strange to an American ear, I changed because I did not want the reader's attention snagging at that particular point. For example, in Chapter One, Clarissa says, "Keats loved Fanny so hard," the U.S. edition reads, "so much." There are no significant differences between the editions.

Marion from Marion, OH: Did you have any doubt that you wanted to include the appendices at the end of your book? Do you think it alters its effect as a novel? I think it strengthens its effectiveness, but did you ever doubt that you would include it, rather than just explain it in the novel?

Ian McEwan: No, I never had any doubts. From the beginning, I always planned to retell the novel in different terms and in a different language. In part, I wanted to relieve the reader of the burden of research in the main body of the novel; in part, I wanted to advance the story; in part, I thought it necessary for the reader to know in retrospect something about the mental condition of Jed Parry. Many readers, especially critics, have thought that the first appendix was a published authentic case history, and one critic even castigated me for sticking to the case too closely. I suppose I should feel flattered. It should be clear from the second appendix that the first is pure invention. The names Wenn and Camia are an anagram of Ian McEwan.

Erin from Babylon, NY: What did you learn about the nature of love while you were writing your book?

Ian McEwan: What I've learned about love in my 49 years is what I put in the book. Often the things we value and the things we most fear can lie side by side. Falling in love or being in love can be an obsessive and delightful state of mind. Some obsessive states of mind can parody falling in love and be very frightening.

Ginnie from Bloomington, Indiana: Hello Mr. McEwan. I admire all of your novels -- your prose is so elegant and lyrical, it's just beautiful. Do you write poetry as well?

Ian McEwan: Thanks for your kind remarks. I haven't written poetry since I was 20. I once wrote a long poem for a friend who was getting married, and it was this poem that made me realize I would never be a poet. It was full of the voices of other poets, and I never found myself in this form. But I do spend a great deal of time playing with sentences, tasting them, if you like, saying them aloud, and I suppose my love of poetry and my respect for the difficulty of doing it well comes through in that care I take with phrases and single sentences.

Terrence from Hollywood, FL: How did you get your first book published? Can you tell us the story? Just curious.... I am a big fan as well as an aspiring author myself.

Ian McEwan: I wrote short stories. I think they offer a very good testing ground for a beginning writer. Failure needn't take more than two or three weeks. You can commit yourself [to a] pastiche or imitation of the writers you admire, you can listen to and give space to all kinds of different voices. I published my earlier stories in literary magazines. I wasn't particularly concerned with book publication. I went my own way. After a year or two, publishers began to notice these stories, and offered to publish them in collected form. This worked for me. And obviously I can't guarantee that it will work for you in the same way. However, I do recommend the short story as a form and as a route to finding your first readership.

Max from Albuquerque: Halfway through the book, when we meet Mrs. Logan, it seems that everything flips over in the way we view the characters, and the story becomes tenser and richer. Did you know, when you wrote the balloon scene, why Logan held on longer than the others?

Ian McEwan: I always thought this had to be an instinctive matter, in that Logan held on because, as Joe says, the flame of altruism burned just a little longer -- enough to close his options.

Tom from Park Rapids, Minnesota: I'm curious about how this story came to be what it is. I am assuming that you knew the ballooning accident was what would set it all in motion, but what about the rest of it? Did you have any idea it would become what it is now?

Ian McEwan: Certainly the novel shaped itself to some extent during the writing. Perhaps it would help you to know the order in which it was written. First I wrote the scenes where Joe goes and buys a gun. At that point, I had no idea who Joe was, or what was threatening him. Sometime later, I wrote the scene in which Jed Parry attempts to kill Joe in a restaurant. At that point, I discovered who Jed Parry was and who Joe was. Next I wrote the conversation between Clarissa and Joe about John Keats. By the end of it, I had a sense of who Clarissa was. It was at this point that I wrote the first chapter. By then, about a year had passed. I had done a great deal of reading and research and my task was then to build the bridge of the novel to connect with the restaurant scene. Technically, the ballooning accident offered a high-temperature moment for Joe and Jed to meet and for Jed's obsession to be triggered.

Roosevelt from Boise, ID: Are you working on a novel right now? Can you tell us a little bit what it's about?

Ian McEwan: I've recently completed a novel called AMSTERDAM. It's subtitled: A COMITRAGEDY. I'd say its tone was generally more comic than tragic. It's about two old friends. One is an editor of a national newspaper, the other is an eminent composer. It's the story of how they each make a disastrous moral judgment and become the agents of each other's undoing. It will be out in Britain in September, and in the States, I hope, early next year.

Irena from Iowa City, Iowa: In this book and in other previous books of yours that I have read, I have noticed a thread of psychological obsessiveness that reappears. Is this something you find you can't stay away from when you are writing? What draws you to write about it? Thanks.

Ian McEwan: Perhaps I do find writing itself an obsessive act, and therefore its obsessive states of mind are right to the fore. I am interested in people in the grip of an idea or a desire. I'm interested, too, in what space this leaves for free will.

Moderator: Thank you so much for joining us, Mr. McEwan. Do you have any closing comments?

Ian McEwan: I've really enjoyed traveling around the U.S. and finding that perhaps because of the information revolution, the passion for reading is enduring. Thank you all. -- Ian McEwan.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

See All Customer Reviews

Enduring Love 4.1 out of 5 based on 0 ratings. 29 reviews.
Guest More than 1 year ago
If you like psychodrama, you will probably like this. Certainly, the opening chapter is rivieting, but the rest of the book doesn't quite measure up. I read it for a book club, but probably would not have finished it otherwise. There is a nice mystery here, but there are better reads out there. don't read the other reviews here -- they give away too much of the plot. I guarantee you will enjoy it less if you know the ending before you start.
Guest More than 1 year ago
Just when one thinks that existence couldn't get any better than this, the ofetn overlooked details converge to unravel the larger tapestry of life. Small threads of doubt and mistrust directed toward others inevitably return and manifest themselves in a gut-wrenching questioning of one's own fallibility. Such is the case with Joe Rose, the main character of Ian McEwan's novel 'Enduring Love.' An idyllic day of intended sharing and unencumbered love above a sweeping English meadow is unraveled by a tragic event that will forever change Joe's life. McEwan's captivatingly eloqent account of the balloon accident in the first chapter does more than hook the reader and set the basis for all later plot situations. It leads the reader to ponder the perplexity of the human condition. It conjures up questions of human values. Just how far are you willing to go to save someone else's life? What personal price are you willing to pay in order to help someone else? Are you willing to face the future challenges that may result from your present actions? 'Enduring Love' is more than a novel that recounts the oftentimes undesirable outcome of actions taken simply because they were right at the moment. The balloon accident is the key that opens the door to other personal revelations and challenges that lay hidden inside Joe Rose. Even though Joe and Clarissa's relationship is more complicated than simply having great sex, I got the impression that that was about the only honest connection that they shared. Joe (a science journalist) views the world as scientific theories and mathematical equations, whereas Clarissa (a professor of literature) perceives life as being a continuously romantic Keats poem. This disparity of perception between them gets more complicated when Jed Parry (a young man who was also galvanized into action during the balloon tragedy) turns out to have a homoerotic obsession for Joe brought about by their ill-fated sharing of a tragedy and a deranged mental condition de Clerambault's syndrome. As Jed begins a shedule of stalking Joe with the intent of bringing him closer to God, Joe and Clarissa begin to question the lack of trust and support between them. They find themselves battling a commitment to each other that never really appeared to be there from the start. If there had been, it would have taken more than Joe's uncontrolled urge to rifle through the personal letters in Clarissa's desk to possibly end the marriage. I found Clarissa to be a self-absorbed person who failed to internalize the romantic compassion of love one learns from literature. This brings me to a few other events in the novel that I found to be a bit implausible. It seems a bit fantastic that Clarissa would not be overly concerned about a man who would obsessively stand across the street and watch her husband's every move. It also seems a bit peculiar that when Jed Parry decides to act, he chooses a public restaurant packed with patrons when he had many more private opportunities. However, who knows what goes on in the minds of those deranged? I grew perturbed that someone as cerebral as Joe would fail to think of easily available means of proving his case. Why wouldn't he merely take Clarissa to the window and show her the deranged man consistently standing across the street? Or better yet, tell her to watch for the man scurrying up the street to avoid being detected by her when she walked out of the door. As a reader, I grew frustrated with the characterization. Rarely have I read a novel where I often didn't care what happened to the protagonist. I didn't fully feel connected to Joe and his conflict. A reader who finds displeasure in reducing life's happenings into black and white scientific theories will find this novel tedious. However, those readers who marvel at the complexities of human nature will find Ian McEwan's book engaging.
Anonymous 10 months ago
Intelligent , Insightful Chilling , Captivating Heartstopping, Heartbreaking
Anonymous More than 1 year ago
I have read several of Ian Mckewan's books, and they are always surprising. But this is perhaps the best. There are several stories in one, they all contribute to each other, and the characters are drawn deeper as events unfold. One scene was so "basically" funny, I couldn't stop laughing.
Anonymous More than 1 year ago
Had to force myself to finish this book. 7th I wasn't reading this for book club probably wouldn't have finished it. When you have to ck dictionary for word definitions every other page not enjoyable. This is from someone who taught psychology .
Anonymous More than 1 year ago
Anonymous More than 1 year ago
Anonymous More than 1 year ago
Anonymous More than 1 year ago
Anonymous More than 1 year ago
Anonymous More than 1 year ago
Omerta More than 1 year ago
McEwan continues to dazzle us with his diversified approach to writing. At one moment he is describing the full bloom of vegetation in an inviting park, in exquisite detail, and in the next he is using street vernacular to identify the sexual act of two lovers. This is what makes him so unique and palatable. You read a little, and want more of the book, and then want to start another one. I'm enthused with the idea of being able to read any of McEwan's work in any order. He does not bow down to the tireless drivel of serials.
Anonymous More than 1 year ago
Anonymous More than 1 year ago
LifeExamined More than 1 year ago
I always have a bit of a tough time reading this reknowned author and this book is no exception. I read and read, almost forcing myself to get through the pages, run across a few accounts that are quite stimulating and imaginative, and then read and read again. Then the book is over. Perhaps I should stop trying to like McEwan?
Anonymous More than 1 year ago
Anonymous More than 1 year ago
Anonymous More than 1 year ago
CatSlater More than 1 year ago
One of the best books I have read and one of the most disturbing. From a chance encounter one's whole world can change and become a nightmare.
Anonymous More than 1 year ago
Guest More than 1 year ago
Colorful prose with visuals that place you at the scene. The weight of emotional young love anchors the reader throughout to the end. Not only a story about love, but a story of chance and conviction sometimes two opposites that never attract. Cant wait to read another one of his books.
Guest More than 1 year ago
As with so many novels, the title reveals nothing. (Are we running out of book titles?) The title suggests a pulp novel. The reality presented, as in any McEwan novel, is from the outset a series of modern moral choices, and the sequellae that may flow from those choices when taken. Some of these choices must be taken in the throes of an emergency. Some are undertaken after great deliberation, or under the control of a poweful obsession. McEwan has the consummate skill to cocoon these choices, and their outcomes, in the shell of a good story. This is a thinking person's novel.
Guest More than 1 year ago
This was my first McEwan novel and it held my attention from page one. He took the story from one plane to another while holding the central themes of obsession and forgiveness. One thing that drew me to this author was the commitment of his readers and now I can see why. This won't be my last.
Guest More than 1 year ago
A deliciously exhilarating plot is to be found in Enduring Love. What an absolute joy to be thoroughly immersed in the main character's flight as he is stalked by a shadowy man with whom he has shared a terrifying event (the attempt to save a boy from death in a runaway balloon.) Again, Mr. McEwan fascinates the reader by drawing us into rich plots and undertones of meaning. The main character is haunted by the man at every turn: If he parts the curtains of his apt., the man is there. Telephone calls and disturbing street meetings lead to a final confrontation preceeded by carefully layered plot and rich characterization. As with so many of Mr. McEwan's books, one will re-read them carefully, savoring every turn of the page. As in Black Dogs, Atonement and Amsterdam, readers experience the thrill of the moment and the ingenious literary skills of a true master. Read everything by this author. His works are literary gems. Kathryn Forrester, Poet Laureate Emeritus of Virginia
Guest More than 1 year ago
At First i was intrigued by the opening chapter but as the novel developed i became more curious and impatient to find out what would happen later. I believe this novel gets better as you read it and that there are alot of links with the title throughout. There are 2 sides to Joe in this - the scientific side and the story telling side, often Joe detaches himself from his current situations by telling them as an onlooker in a story form. In real life people can relate to this as in awkward situations you wish you could detach yourself away from it. Jed Parrys views on matters stem from religious beliefs - he see`s Joe as a challenge because he believes it is his duty to bring him to God. This novel is a gripping and exciting read and i would recommend it to anyone.