Having read Oates's "Wonderland" quartet in sequence, I believe I can discern several recurrent themes. Each character lacks a clear understanding of how to achieve personal happiness or what they truly desire. No one seems to "fit in" seamlessly; interpersonal connections are improvised and fleeting. Moreover, I scarcely sense any progression. As described in "Expensive People," the protagonist is like a "sieve," never learning sufficiently or evolving significantly, and this concept extends in "Wonderland."
However, there are differences here. In "Wonderland," for once, we center on a single protagonist, Jesse Vogel (unlike Clara, her father, and her son in "Garden," or Loretta and her two eldest children in "them"). Additionally, he is educated, thoughtful, successful, and ultimately even wealthy - an "expensive person," as Richard Everett might term it. Despite these positive aspects, this is far from a comedy, and Oates still denies us a story with a happy ending.
The novel commences with a young man fleeing his murderous father and concludes thirty years later, with the same man listening to his own daughter call him the devil. This represents a particular brand of pessimism, where a man persistently endeavors to earn his place in the world yet can never find tranquility. The story twice refers to "wonderland": Jesse's daughter comes to dread the book by Lewis Carroll, and his wife embarks on a painfully frivolous trip to a "wonderland" shopping center. Jesse starts out thin but then becomes an overeater, gains a significant amount of weight, and later loses much of it. He becomes a neurosurgeon, delving into the very thing that gives people (the illusion of?) personality. Jesse often feels as if he is actually two people, and his daughter becomes a drug addict. This book probes what defines us and how consistent our traits truly are, much like Lewis Carroll did with the bottle and the cookies in his own "Wonderland" books. "The personality is not permanent. It's absolutely unstable," Dr. Perrault remarks at one point. And I wonder - is this necessarily a bad thing?
I perceive this book as pessimistic, and Oates has stated that it was extremely painful to write (and reread), yet it has less of the nightmarish quality that I experienced in "them." This is a story about individuals attempting to come to terms with their own past, either by living with it, ignoring it, or fleeing from it. I don't think they can accept it, but they don't lash out violently against it (as Stephen and Jules did in earlier books). It is a kind of Wonderland, disturbing and perplexing, phantasmagoric in its shifting and manipulation of the reader. Here more than ever, I felt that the characters made their own choices. At times, they believed they knew what they wanted, but of course, the allure would fade or succumb to a stronger desire for something that pulled the character in the opposite direction. Strangely enough, despite the ever-changing landscape, I discovered moments of hope here, as certain characters would strive to establish roots somewhere or recover from a disaster with unexpected dignity. The personality can change, but it still retains the direction that the past has imparted, and I think this may be the key to the human spirit.