Neil Jordans clever narrative technique and lyrical

descriptions make Shade a memorable and moving story of

love and lost innocence.
Many authors aim to create memorable and moving works of fction
which leave the reader longing for more. Neil Jordan has admirably
attempted to make his novel Shade a memorable and moving story
of love and lost innocence. His lyrical descriptions add to his unique
style of writing and help to create beautiful imagery throughout the
novel. However, the combination of a narrative structure which
icks confusingly between the past and the present and the
constantly changing perspectives throughout the novel distracts the
reader from the wording of the te!t and leaves them unable to
appreciate this literary work.
Jordan undoubtedly has a talent when it comes to using descriptive
language. His fantastic control of words works frstly to inspire
detailed imagery in the reader"s mind. #rom the very frst page, he
con$ures images of places which quickly become central to the
novel, such as the %oyne river. &#rom the inkily silver reecting
surface, '() to the parabolas of ripples that would appear and then
vanish, to the regular lapping of small pyramids of water(* 'Jordan
+,,-./) Jordan then goes on to use his choice of language to
provide the frst impression of a new character, such as 0sobel
1hawcross. &(with a prim mouth and a carriage as straight as a
pencil.* 'Jordan +,,-.+-) 2hese descriptions are invaluable in
portraying the setting and characters of the novel and prove to be
particularly noticeable in early chapters. 2hey create imagery which
is memorable, staying with the reader throughout the novel and
afterwards. 0n other parts of the te!t, Jordan uses equally powerful
descriptions to portray signifcant events. 3n e!ample of this is
when Nina and 4eorge engage in se!ual intercourse. &( it felt like
water, a trickle of it frst and then a slow moving river that bent as
she bent and shifted as she shifted(* 'Jordan +,,-.56,) He does
not necessarily e!plain it in the most e!plicit manner, but Jordan"s
lyrical description of the scene makes it moving for the reader and
highlights the loss of innocence the characters e!perience.
However, Jordan"s e!ecution of his choice in narrative structure
leaves much to be desired. 0t is uncommon, but not unheard of, for
an author to modify a past and present narrative structure as Jordan
has7 that is, to have both past and present plots followed almost
simultaneously. 2he challenge given to authors who choose to use a
structure like this is the need to make clear links between the two
narratives, so that they form a complete work as intended. 0n this
aspect, Jordan has been unsuccessful. 0n several parts of the te!t,
particularly the early chapters, he has failed to create clear links
that make the reection on the past relevant to the narrative
detailing the present. #or e!ample, early in the novel, when the
narrative focuses on the present, the reader follows the actions of
4eorge after he murders Nina 'p 5+). 0mmediately following this the
narrative changes to detail a time in Nina"s past and she recounts
how her parents met 'p 5/). 0t is very clear that there are no links
between these two passages, indicating to the reader that there are
two completely di8erent and unrelated plots. 2he recurrence of
passages such as these, while providing a comforting consistency in
a tumultuous te!t, creates unwanted and unnecessary divisions.
Moreover, in writing completely unrelated passages such as these,
Jordan creates more questions and leaves the reader feeling as
though they are missing important information. 3 few pages after
the above e!ample, the reader is informed about the younger Nina
and her imaginative nature 'p 569++). 2he chapter then ends by
following 4eorge"s actions in the present 'p ++9+/). 3s the reader
searches for the none!istent links between these two passages,
they are led to believe that they have missed some important piece
of information which would create the missing links.
#urthermore, Jordan"s selection of changing perspectives only serves
to alienate the reader. 2he use of Nina"s ghost or spirit as the main
narrator of the novel creates an immediate and ongoing sense of
conict as Jordan uses omniscience in the frst person. 2his sense of
conict becomes even stronger when the narrator is omniscient in
the present, rather than the past, where memories allow for such a
divergence. #or e!ample, the reader is introduced to 4regory"s
dealings with the funeral through Nina"s perspective. 0n one
paragraph, Nina e!plains his thoughts, memories and desires,
despite the fact that she has no way of knowing this. &He wants to
perform the rite( He could remember well( which seems to
4regory as old(& 'Jordan +,,-.55/) 1uch a high degree of
discrepancy, especially when sustained across a vast amount of te!t
such as Shade, becomes tiresome and distracts the reader from the
rest of the novel. 0n addition to this, the reader views most of the
other characters solely through Nina"s eyes, creating a distance
between the characters and the reader. :ith the main narrator
already dead and emotionally distant, the lack of connection leaves
the reader completely disengaged. 3 reader needs to connect with
the te!t in some way, and so this lack of emotional connection
makes it highly unlikely that the reader will be emotionally moved
by the te!t. :hen Jordan does fnally include alternative
perspectives, they are used in a way which compromises their
e8ectiveness. 3t times, the change in perspectives initially seems
welcome but then does little more than create a sense of
interruption. #or e!ample, when the narrative of the present is told
in dialogue between 4regory and Janie, it is a welcome change from
the consistent narrative of Nina"s spirit. However, when the
narrative begins to simultaneously tell what happened during the
time of :orld :ar 0 from both the perspective of those who were
fghting and those who stayed behind 'p 5;<9+=+), the changing
perspectives create the idea of two continually interrupted
monologues, rather than the sense of consistency and wholeness
that Jordan seems to have been aiming for.
0n his novel 1hade, Neil Jordan has, like many other authors,
endeavoured to create a novel which tells a memorable and moving
tale of love and lost innocence. 3 feature of his unique style of
writing is his talent for lyrical descriptions which seem to paint
images of the 0rish countryside in the reader"s mind. >nfortunately,
these descriptions are continually overshadowed by his
unsuccessful use of an otherwise clever narrative structure and the
inept use of various perspectives throughout the te!t. ?ne would
hope that future readers can persist with the te!t long enough to
see it come together into something vaguely resembling a great
literary work.