43 pages • 1 hour read
Annie DillardA modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
Annie Dillard is the author and the sole viewpoint character of Holy the Firm. By the time Dillard wrote Holy the Firm, she had already written 1974’s Pulitzer-Prize-winning Pilgrim at Tinker Creek, which solidified her reputation as a nonfiction nature writer. Holy the Firm shares many thematic and formal similarities with Pilgrim, particularly in the way that both works aim to understand God through close study of nature. Dillard, born April 20, 1945, was 31 when she set out to write about the three-day period in Puget Sound that would eventually turn into Holy the Firm. Though the book is only 66 pages, it took Dillard 14 months of full-time work to complete it.
Dillard’s visions could lead readers to construe her as an unreliable narrator, but that risks missing the larger themes of the work. Much of the book’s narrative relies on Dillard’s accounts of the world and her visions as she experiences them; this leads to subtle changes in scenery or other concrete facts in a way that would, in other texts, signal unreliability. These changes, along with Dillard’s visions, are better understood as a direct representation of her understanding of the physical world. Dillard depicts herself as a sort of Christian mystic who can at times see through to the spiritual realm. Though Dillard often slips into hyperbole, she does so for the technique's rhetorical effects. Some critics have speculated that Dillard used psychedelic drugs while writing the book, though Dillard herself has refuted that claim.
Other critics have read the book as an argument for converting to Christianity. While Dillard has not responded to this interpretation, she is not affiliated with any church and has explored many different religious doctrines in her works. She currently identifies as non-religious.
In Holy the Firm, Dillard’s character emerges largely through the way she interacts with the word. Dillard sees a lot of herself in the young Julie Norwich, but also in many of the creatures she observes. The way Dillard considers the burning moth, for instance, and whether she was “new, or old,” and if she had “done her work” (16-17), resembles her own self-questioning about when she “Shall […] be old?” (44).
Small, the cat who lives with Dillard in Puget Sound, plays a number of essential roles in Holy the Firm. Dillard does not appear to have a close relationship with Small. She even refuses to eat in the same room as the cat, “throw[ing] her out before breakfast, so [Dillard] can eat” (13). This refusal to eat in the same room as Small is particularly interesting because it is juxtaposed with Dillard’s fascinated meditation on the spider’s dietary habits.
One of the main differences between Small and the creatures with whom Dillard sympathizes (such as the spider, the moth, or even Julie) is that Small seems to be an exception to the kind of absurd suffering that Dillard focuses on in her narrative. In fact, Small is often an agent of that suffering rather than its victim. Small’s role in the universe’s suffering is, of course, small; it is best represented by the “wren she has killed” (26). Unlike the spider, who eats her victims to sustain her own life, Small seems to kill randomly and without desire to consume her victims. The wren is untouched other than its “dead wings point[ing] askew on the circular rug” (26). The connection between the bird’s wings and a clock face may also suggest that Small represents the kind of violence that time commits. The connection between Small and time is clearer when she brings in “a god, scorched” (27). One of Dillard’s main threads, particularly in the second part of the book, relies on the idea that gods too are subject to time (43).
If Small is understood to be an antagonistic agent who does not suffer but instead creates suffering, Julie’s attempts to stuff Small into “a black dress long and full as a nun’s” suggest Julie’s own efforts to master these forces and her ability to turn Dillard’s ideas of suffering “upside down” (40).
The moth that Dillard witnessed fly into a candle, get “caught, burnt dry, and held” is the key figure in Dillard’s Part 1 investigation of suffering. Dillard uses the figure of the moth to make a number of connections between fire, sacrifice, and artistic creation that are later explored through their relationship with Julie Norwich and Dillard herself.
Unlike the other moths that Dillard had witnessed singe their wings, the moth that grabbed Dillard’s attention and sympathy got trapped by the wax until the wings “widened into flame, a saffron-yellow flame that robed her to the ground like any immolating monk” (17). Dillard’s connection between the moth and an “immolating monk” suggests that she sees the moth’s act as a kind of spiritual sacrifice, and this sense is redoubled when she describes it as “a flame-faced virgin” and “a hollow saint” (17). Dillard also (and relatedly, given the relationship Dillard sketches out between art and spirituality) sees the moth’s immolation as an artistic act akin to her own act of writing in “a skull, a fire tower, wooden, and empty” (22). Though the moth is no longer a relevant figure once Julie appears, the associations that Dillard makes between the moth, fire, and holy sacrifice carry through to the end of Holy the Firm.
Aside from Dillard herself, Julie Norwich is Holy the Firm’s most important character. Her presence allows Dillard to focus many of her questions and themes around a single representative character. However, there is no concrete evidence of the plane crash that Dillard recounts in Holy the Firm, and the character of Julie Norwich is probably a complete fabrication and projection of Dillard’s own thought processes. Dillard likely named Julie after Julian of Norwich, an English anchoress from the Middle Ages known for her revelatory writings, Revelations of Divine Love, which are the earliest surviving English writing by a woman.
The themes of Julian’s writings bear many similarities to Dillard’s Holy the Firm, and both place special emphasis on the divinity of suffering. The two also share a similar conception of Christ, particularly when Dillard wonders whether “Christ descend[ed] once and for all to no purpose, in a kind of divine and kenotic suicide, or ascend[ed] once and for all, pulling his cross up after him” (47). The connection between Julie and Julian does not go much further than this, however, and the choice to name Julie after Julian is more representative of these shared themes than of Julie herself embodying Julian’s theology. The connection does, however, explain Dillard’s insistence that Julie join a convent.
Most of what Dillard relates about the fictional character Julie concerns Dillard’s experiences of her on the farm a few weeks prior to her accident. She is a “thin child, pointy-chinned, yellow bangs and braids” and shares many of Dillard’s physical qualities (39). After her accident, Julie’s suffering becomes representative of the absurd suffering of human existence, and Dillard makes much of the connection between Julie’s burnt face, the burning face of the seraph, and the burning mind of the holy artist. This connection is most explicit at the end of the narrative, where Dillard imagines Julie “held fast by love in the world like the moth in wax, [her] life a wick, [her] head on fire with prayer” (76).
Julie does not only represent the suffering of the world, however. Her attempts to whistle, whether successful or not, connect her with the little god who “whistl[es] at [Dillard’s] ear” (28). Julie’s ability to whistle, not yet fully formed when Dillard first meets her, becomes symbolic of her actualization. When Dillard imagines Julie living a happy, normal life after her accident, she states, “Mornings you’ll whistle, full of the pleasure of days” (76).
By Annie Dillard