The narrator writes everything down and keeps an index so that nothing is lost. But what happens when your own notes tell a story that you do not remember?

← The House · The whole series · The Other →
Ten items. Say your answer out loud before you reveal it.
Read the sentence, guess the meaning of the word in bold, then reveal.
Three terms: look back on · piece together · cross-check. Say the right one, then reveal.
One missing word fits every phrase in the group. Say it, then reveal.
Read each part. After it, answer the quick check from memory, then discuss one question.
The narrator is a devoted record-keeper. He fills notebook after notebook with what he sees and does, and he numbers them and keeps an index so that any entry can be found again. He dates events not by a calendar but by what happened that year: the year a particular bird arrived in a particular hall, the year of a great flood.
To him the journals are not a hobby. They are how he knows who he is. If he forgets something, he can look it up. If he is confused, he can read what he wrote on a calmer day.
This habit gives the book much of its texture. We read his entries as he writes them, in the present tense of a mind that is organised, patient and trusting of its own words.
1. How does he date events?
2. Why do the journals matter to him?
3. What do we read in the book?
1. By what happened that year, not by a calendar.
2. They are how he knows who he is and finds what he has forgotten.
3. His entries, written in an organised, patient voice.
Gradually, the journals begin to cause a different feeling. The narrator finds older pages in which he seems to be a slightly different person. He used other words, held other beliefs and wrote about things he cannot now recall. His records, which he trusted completely, do not match the picture in his head.
He does what a careful person does. He reads again, compares entries and tries to find a pattern. He is not alarmed at first. A gap, he reasons, may only be a gap.
But the book makes us feel the cost of a good index. The more precisely he records, the more clearly he sees what is missing.
1. What does he find in the older pages?
2. How does he react?
3. What is the cost of keeping a good record?
1. That he seems to be a slightly different person, using other words and referring to things he cannot recall.
2. Carefully, by reading again and comparing entries, not with alarm at first.
3. The more precisely he records, the more clearly he sees what is missing.
The idea behind this part of the novel is old and unsettling: a person is partly the story they can tell about themselves. If someone else controls the records, or if the records stop, what happens to the person?
The narrator has to decide how far he can trust a version of himself that he cannot remember. He is also learning that the people around him may have reasons to prefer one version over another.
Readers often talk about this as the heart of the book. It is not a mystery with a single answer. It is a question about how we know who we are: memory, evidence or the account other people give.
1. What is the old idea behind this part of the novel?
2. What does the narrator have to decide?
3. Why do readers think of this as the heart of the book?
1. That a person is partly the story they can tell about themselves.
2. How far he can trust a version of himself that he cannot remember.
3. Because it is a question about how we know who we are, not a puzzle with one answer.
When you try to reconstruct the past, it helps to separate two things: what you wrote down and what you remember. Put them on a grid and you get four places a fact can be. The Memory Grid asks two questions about any fact: is it written down? and do I remember it?
Each sentence is about a fact from the past. Which box of the Memory Grid is it?
1. Solid — remembered and written down.
2. Memory only — a memory with no record, so be careful how strongly you state it.
3. Record only — written down, not remembered.
4. Unknown — no record and no memory.
5. Record only — the photo is the record.
6. Solid — both a record and a memory.
7. Memory only — memory with no support.
8. Unknown — neither a memory nor a record.
Records can be wrong too. A diary written in a bad mood or an old email can be inaccurate. Record only is not the same as true.
Memory changes. Each time we remember something we rebuild it, so a very vivid memory can still be mistaken.
Other people's accounts are a third source. When yours disagrees with theirs, put both on the grid.
When you talk about what happened, the language you choose shows how sure you are. A small set of verbs and modals lets you say exactly how much you know.
Complete each sentence with must have, can't have or might have, and the verb in brackets.
1. The entry is in his handwriting, so he (write) it himself.
2. She was abroad that week, so she (see) him on Monday.
3. I am not sure, but he (leave) the book on the train.
4. The ink is still wet, so someone (be) here a minute ago.
1. must have written — strong belief
2. can't have seen — strong disbelief
3. might have left — possibility
4. must have been — strong belief from evidence
Rewrite each sentence with the word in brackets so that it sounds less certain.
1. He forgot the date. (seems)
2. The pages were written by two people. (appear)
3. It rained that day. (I seem to remember)
4. She left in the spring. (If I remember rightly)
1. He seems to have forgotten the date.
2. The pages appear to have been written by two people.
3. I seem to remember that it rained that day.
4. If I remember rightly, she left in the spring.
Now tell a memory in four sentences. Use one must have, one might have and one I seem to remember.
Choose a task, start the timer and talk. On your own it works as a talk; with a partner or a group, take turns and respond to each other.
The narrator records everything. What would you want to record about your own life, and what would you prefer to forget? Explain why.
Choose one event from your past. Put it on the Memory Grid and say how sure you are, using the right strength of language.
Tell us about a time when you and another person remembered the same event differently. What was the difference? Who was right, and how could you find out?