MovieChat Forums > Picnic at Hanging Rock (1979) Discussion > There is no missing chapter that explain...

There is no missing chapter that explains what happened but I will


The missing chapter

You might have heard that there is a missing 18th chapter that explains what happened to the girls, you might have read a discussion about it. You might have read a summery or even obtained a copy of said chapter; if you have then you would know that the chapter basically tells how the girls entered into a crack in the rock and into a place suspended in time, thus Hanging Rock is actually a rock hanging in time as well as space. If you think that this answers anything I advice you to stop reading and go immediately to a psychiatric hospital and demand a thorough examination of your head.

The missing chapter does not answer anything at all, indeed it demands a thousand more question than the one question about what did happen to the girls. So although I don't deny the existence of an extra chapter I completely refuse the idea that it explains what happened. Any editor worth his name would cut several chapters from any book, but no editor in the history of books have cut the final chapter that answers the mystery.

But we are told that the chapter was cut on the publisher's request. No publisher in the world would ask a writer to make their book more ambiguous and without a proper satisfying ending for two main reasons: an ambiguous book without a satisfying ending would suit less readers than otherwise and more importantly this interferes with the authorship of the book.

So why was the chapter cut? To understand the problem of the chapter we have to remember the history of F&SF (Fantasy & Science Fiction) which started as a completely different industry than book publishing even to the point of using different paper, different fonts, different covers, different marketing and pricing. Readers of more traditional books looked down and despised the growing popularity of F&SF and although certain elements of fantasy (like those present in the missing chapter) were once accepted as a literary device to represent the metaphysical part of life by the 60's such elements were completely exorcised from traditional books.

The publisher advised Joan Lindsay to cut the one chapter with fantastical elements to preserve the purity of the book and make it acceptable for the readers.

What really happened

In a nutshell nothing happened because none of the girls (Miranda, Marion, Irma, Edith and Sara) were real, they were all figments of the imagination of a girl that I will call ur-Irma, she is not the same as Irma but shares many of her physical aspects.

Ur-Irma like the girl in Saki's The Open Window is a specialist in making up stories and she is actually our narrator, a highly unreliable narrator that weaves stories to hide a single important fact: she has lost her virginity. That is it, that's the whole story: a girl losing her virginity and becoming a woman.

Miranda represent the beauty (both of body and spirit), Marion the philosopher, Irma the physical part of the girl, Edith the child and Sara the tragic self-pity. Ur-Irma has parts of these five girls in herself, she is not as beautiful as Miranda or wise as Marion or childish as Edith or have suffered in her short life as Sara, she is a real girl while those four are aspects of her personality.

You probably want to know what exactly happened, unfortunately I can't tell you that because ur-Irma is a liar who greatly obscured what really happened to cover her loss of virginity. Nonetheless we can infer some things: ur-Irma left the picnic and went walking up the rock, where she met a boy and something happened between them that shocked her and forced her to retreat into a childlike state, suppressing her beauty, wisdom and physical self. After a week she met the boy again and lost her virginity becoming a woman.

Twice we are told by the doctor quite explicitly that Edith and Irma are “intact.” In the whole story there is no single explicit fact more clearly pronounced than the intactness of Edith and Irma, or so does ur-Irma want us to believe, because she has lost her virginity at Hanging Rock.

When she visits the school she is clearly a woman looking at children who wonder what happened to their friend who looks so different now, none cries the loudest than Edith. But what about Sara, well many children left in boarding schools have similar feelings to orphans, feelings of abandonment and loneliness, this manifested itself in Sara, who is an orphan suffering too tragically even not allowed to visit the rock.

As ur-Irma becomes a woman she understand the limits of her beauty and wisdom, the need to restrain the child in her and leaves self-pity behind her at the school as she travels to rejoin her parents.

I leave the other parts (e.g. what about the governess, who is the boy, etc) for you to figure out.

reply

Hm, I'm going to take a position here. The latter half of your explanation is nonsensical. You want us to completely ignore the actual "missing" chapter for your own interpretation? I think I'll trust the author on this one and not you.

reply

I don't ignore the extra chapter, I argue that it transfers the mystery from a 'narrative mystery' and turns it into a 'mystical mystery' and thus the extra chapter provides no real explanation.

reply

There is nothing 'actual' about that so-called "missing chapter", and there is no reason to 'trust the author' on that chapter, because Lindsay never ever said or wrote a word about it.

All we know is that the publisher published a book which *he asserts* contains a 'missing chapter'. But there is no proof whatsoever that it was actually written by Lindsay. It is obviously written in a style deviating from the first 17 chapters, and 'solves' mysteries about which Lindsay was very outspoken that they were conceived of as mysteries, ought to remain mysteries, and that she did not know a 'solution' to them either.

There is no manuscript, no will, no written agreement between Lindsay and her publisher about that 'missing chapter'. Anyone who wants to believe it was actually written by her should worry about the total lack of evidence for that.

There have been many shams in the world of art and literature. This could well be one of them.

reply

There is such a thing as word print analysis that would confirm or deny whether Lindsay wrote the chapter.

---
It's not "sci-fi", it's SF!

reply

So please point us to that 'word print analysis', whatever that is.

And please tell us why it would 'confirm or deny' Lindsay's authorship.

My best guess is that Lindsay did NOT write that so-called 'missing chapter'.

reply

tl;dr

reply

The movie is excellent but the missing chapter is absolute bollocks. It greatly devalues the original work and renders it a farce. The 'answer' to the great mystery is just some New Age clap-trap.

OP, I don't think your explanation is very reasonable but it's certainly interesting. Thanks for sharing.

reply

Was there New Age in 1967?

God is subtle, but He is not malicious. (Albert Einstein)

reply

I second your opinion. The lacking quality of the so-called '18th chapter' is easily explained by the idea that it was not written by Lindsay. Actually, it is only the publisher of the chapter who asserted that is was originally written by Lindsay. There is no convincing proof whatsoever of his assertion.

It doesn't seem to worry anybody. And that worries me.

reply

Why are you so obsessed with this conspiracy theory? I've seen you comment on it in several threads here, plus Amazon.com. Perhaps you can inform us who did write Secret.

"Do you know what lies at the bottom of the mainstream? Mediocrity!"

reply

Well, one man's "obsession" is another man's intrigue. As an academic and philologist it is my task, if not nature, to ask critical questions once doubt arises as to the origin and genesis of a text.

Of course I cannot inform you who wrote 'The Secret'. The problem is that people who DO assert that "they know" who wrote it, have no evidence apart from hearsay. That, and the evident commercial interest of publishing 'The Secret', gives me reason to maintain my doubt. That not many people share my doubt, does not invalidate it.

There have been many cases of fake and plagiarism in all forms of art: in literature, in paintings, in music etc. Mostly for reasons of greed, sometimes pride. Every piece of art that is pothumously attributed to some great writer, painter, composer is usually meticulously examined for 'hard evidence', and many fakes have been detected. A meticulous examination of 'hard evidence' is lacking in the case of Joan Lindsay and "The Secret of Hanging Rock".

I suggest you listen to Mrs. Lindsay herself, who can be seen and heard on video recordings from the early 1970's, who is *very* vocal about the lack of a 'solution' to the mystery in "Picnic at Hanging Rock", and who holds a fiery defense about why a solution NEEDS to be lacking and why it would ruin the book. This is very much NOT a woman who would secretly keep a "Secret" in her back pocket and had told her publisher to publish it after her death.

Yes, my raising doubts (in your words: 'conspiracy theory') is not very mainstream. But why should I conform to the mainstream? Look at your own motto, below your post.

reply

Not sure that I agree with your explanation but it does have an intriguing "life of pi" quality to it: if you don't like your reality, tell a different story. At least you have an interesting interpretation that's worth thinking about.


--------------------------------
Movies are IQ tests. The IMDB boards are each person's opportunity to broadcast their score.

reply

This is a concept explored by Daniel Wallace books, extensively. If you are unfamiliar with this author, it is highly recommended that you check him out, assuming you were that intrigued by the notion you presented in your post.






I'm not a control freak, I just like things my way

reply

The story transforms itself into a ur-mystical mystery?

What exactly happened at the Hanging Rock, has a human actually gone missing there at any time at all?

my vote history:
http://www.imdb.com/user/ur13767631/ratings

reply

Another layman psychologist crawled out of the woodwork... What boring waffle - amost moreso than the final chapter "revelation" about the crack in the rock that consumed them all.


"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan

reply

Utter nonsense. The final chapter of the book, which DID explain the mystery, was deleted from the book because the publisher and author thought leaving it out deepened the mystery of the story.

As for the rest of your "explanation", well, it is just a lost of egotistical mental masturbation, worth nothing to anyone but you and your inflated opinion of yourself.

reply

RUDE!

reply

No facts exist that prove the idea that Joan Lindsay wrote that 'final chapter' nor that she 'thought leaving it out deepened the mystery'.

That idea is all based on hearsay, nothing else.

The idea that she wrote and rejected that chapter would have been likely if a manuscript existed, a typoscript existed, annotations in her own hand existed, authentic correspondence with her publisher existed, a validated transfer of rights from Lindsay to the publisher existed, a will existed in which she mentions that chapter.

None of these documents exist. None whatsoever.

We do have proof, or at least strong indications of the opposite. Lindsay can be seen and heard explaining that she did *not* write an explanation or solution to the mystery presented in 'Picnic at Hanging Rock'. She fiercely advocates that the book was written open-ended, like 'The Turn of the Screw'. She said that she *deliberately* wrote the book without a solution.

So it is only rational to find the hypothesis more likely that Lindsay did *not* write that chapter. Even though her publisher asserted that she did - and made quite some money by telling us that story.

It pushed the sales of "Picnic at Hanging Rock", it pushed the sales of his "The Secret of Hanging Rock" and it pushed a renewed interest in the movie that made him a certain profit.

reply

i made it through 6 minutes of the movie. It's a piece of garbage and I came here to see if anyone had an explanation for the the TV synopsis that says there are more questions than answers.

reply

"I leave the other parts (e.g. what about the governess, who is the boy, etc) for you to figure out."

Oh come now, you were doing so well, don't give up now....

;)


You fill me with inertia - George Spiggott

reply