1. The reader can infer different ideas about Gabriel Conroys character.

His values are

slightly revealed at the beginning when he is interested in Lily, even flirting with her. He seems to be
a very cultivated man, sometimes too proud of it but, although he tries to be humble It has fallen to
my [] a very pleasing task but a task for which I am afraid my poor powers as a speaker are all too
inadequate, he actually feels superior to everyone What did he care that his aunts were only two
ignorant old women?. He is in a high social position due to his studies and his family, something
that makes him a very well-seen and reliable person at first sight, for example said by his aunt Kate
its such a relief [] that Gabriel is here. I always feel easier in my mind when hes here, and he
wants to be seen that way, so he is all the time questioning himself about what is proper and what is
not, living surrounded by conventions, and hiding his real personality: to summarize it, he is a very
insecure person trying to show the opposite way. Everything about Gabriels personality is very
obscure: literary speaking, because he is always in the shadows (something that helps the reader to
have that feeling) and he is always feeling insecure about what is better to do or to say, because he
wants to be liked by everyone by making jokes and using proper words while speaking, but at the
same time he is selfish and wants to damage people using his own tricks, such as irony for example;
and going deeper, Gabriel feels himself imprisoned by conventions, he always locks his more intense
feelings and impulses, and the reader sometimes can be confused because it can be believed that he
has good values and a positive personality. But Gabriel is constantly trying to hide his real intentions,
therefore finally everything is discovered. Gabriel is truly happy after his wife listens to a man
singing because he feels proud of his wife, a woman of his property, and he starts feeling happy and
fascinated because he thinks that she is his He had felt proud and happy then, happy that she was
his, proud of her grace and wifely carriage. He feels more sexually attracted to her and he starts
touching and using her the way he wants for he wants to be her owner, but even in those moments
alone with his wife, he sees himself as an animal who has to control his real impulses (more
conventions) and almost every line of the last part shows how indoctrinated he has been to take part
in society ad to be above women, knowing that it is not good.

2. Gabriel is furious about that because he knows that her heart does not entirely belong to
him and that, although he felt superior to everybody because he had a wife who loved him more than
everything, Michael Furey actually died for her, and he feels that she knows that Gabriel has never
done anything similar for her (sorry about the dizzy writing, in my head makes more sense than in
the paper), so he feels inferior to that man and he cannot stand it, because he knows that the love she
felt for Michael was more powerful and real than the one they had at that moment, and he cannot
stand another man being above him and being more important for his wife than Gabriel himself. In
my opinion, Gabriel thought that he was tricking his wife with a relationship that is worth nothing,
full of superficial happiness, and he discovered that their relationship compared to the previous one
that his wife had with Michael was garbage. He realized that his wifes heart was more valuable than
he thought, and that her personality, values and principles worth it more than he expected, so that
made him feel angry and deceived. Gabriel was a hypocrite because he thought she had been
cheating on him all those years thinking in love terms about Michael (I am pretty sure that when a
woman thinks of a man, it has not to be always in sexual terms) and he was not realizing that he
should be proud of her because someone literally died for her, is it not beautiful? Not for Gabriel,
someone who wishes to have an affair with Lily. That is why it seems that Gabriel is planning to kill
his wife Soon, perhaps, he would be sitting in the same drawing-room, dressed in black, [] and
telling him how Julia had died. He would cast about in his mind for some words that might console
her, and would find only lame and useless ones. Yes, yes: that would happen very soon.

Moving to the second question, I looked for more editions of the book to find the footnotes and first
of all, I read that Galway is the born city of Nora Barnacle (Joyces wife) and secondly, I discovered
that once before meeting Joyce, when Nora was a teenager in Galway, she was in love with a man
called Michael Bodkin who died of tuberculosis when he was 19. Maybe Joyce was inspired of that
fact for this tale.

Sources:

Galway Independent. Talking history: Nora Barnacle by William Henry. Wednesday, 8th March,
2017 1:00am.
http://www.galwayindependent.com/opinion/talkinghistory/articles/2017/03/08/4136161-nora-
barnacle/

3. From the knowledge that I have got of the different types of narrators, I think that this
narrator is an intrusive one rather an omniscient one, or both of them, because I do not know if the
intrusive narrator includes the omniscient narrator too. In any case, he sometimes knows everything
about the characters and other times he admits that he does not know where or how their characters
are, and he wants as well to maintain their soul and personality by not assigning them different
qualities than the ones their personality possesses. He allows himself to advice both the reader and
the characters (there is a good example more or less related to this answer, in which, at the end of
Chapter 55 Fowles shows himself looking to his characters: Now the question I am asking, as I
stare at Charles, is not quite the same as the two above. But rather, what the devil am I going to do
with you? and later when Charles directly looks at Fowles), he uses all the possible singular and
plural grammatical persons when writing, he uses flashbacks when he speaks about previous times
and the present time (both in the novel time and in the real time while he writes the work, as for
example when he mentions trends and movies), and he hesitates and questions himself through the
whole work.

4. In chapter 13 the process of writing is analyzed, stopping in some way the plot for a while.
Although this writing technique was new at that time, what we cannot deny is that the reader was
expecting that (it is the best equivalence that I could find for se vea venir) because Fowles was
continually in and out of the plot from the very beginning, like in a surrealistic work in which the
author has the compelling need to stop the action in order to explain something related to it ( or not,
but the use of metalinguistic vocabulary is obvious). So Fowles is showing his process of writing and
he explains how he takes care of his characters or creations. At this point Fowles admits that he
wants them as free but loyal to their personality at the same time to the point that he does not want to
make his characters do, think, or make something that could betray their soul, like if putting himself
in the place of a father or God (if any). To sum it up, in this chapter the narrator/Fowles shows
himself as another character in the work (though in my opinion the narrator in The French
Lieutenants Woman can be considered as another character through the whole work) to express how
he has been struggling in this process of shaping the characters (or just making them real copies of
their moulds).

5. The French Lieutenants Woman ending is a well-built one, because the writer is telling
why he wrote that ending. He is explaining his reasons for finish that way, which is something
revealing and calming, just because the reader has for once all the clues for the novel, and this could
have the sense of being against the own ending (or all the different endings shown) but it is not,
because without having all those clues, the reader is sure to be completely lost. And eventually
everything can be summarized as a child game, in which the author chooses a more or less suitable
ending, but in this case Fowles knows that the reader has been enlightened yet and she or he is not
going to rely in everything they read because they have been told so and warned by the reader.

Moving to the second question and sincerely speaking, I find Long Story Short ending quite
impressive and fun because, after playing with the reader about if the writing is real or invented,
about how the story is going to continue, finish, or start again, etc eventually the reader can realize
that everything is in the authors mind because maybe he could have been cheated by his brother and
his fiance and he is imagining a surrealistic situation in which, for him, there is a happy ending full
of revenge and greetings (just to continue with the irony).