...
Show More
Fairly early in this novel, I encountered a line that started me laughing for ten minutes (much to the irritation of the rest of the family). That raised expectations that it was going to be more enjoyable than it subsequently turned out to be. The going later became so tedious, in fact, that I considered not finishing.
The first problem was that the two main characters continually behave in a way that defies common sense so drastically that I felt physically uncomfortable. For example, having taken a plane to a random destination (Senegal, as it happens) with no purpose other than to touch down briefly, hand out money to random strangers, and then move on, they find themselves doing stuff like sneaking into a stranger's house to leave flowers (and hopefully not be shot in the process) and trying to tape an envelope full of money to a belligerent goat in the middle of the night.
It may be that I place too much value on money, and rational behavior, so that what they do violates my core principles. But whatever the reason, I want to identify with characters more closely than I could this case.
Extrapolating from what the principal narrator tells us, their undertaking may have been motivated in part by the double trauma of recently losing their mutual best friend in a gruesome highway accident and then being brutally attacked by strangers while clearing out the friend's storage locker. Throughout the narrative he describes the shocked reactions of people when they see his still-battered face, and quite clearly the lingering emotional pain is worse yet.
But when the other main character later steps in to add his perspective, he tells us there WAS no third friend, and no beating. He suggests these elements could simply be efforts "to thicken the plot a bit, to give it some kind of pseudo-emotional gravitas." He complains about the addition of these fictions and the omission of important things that did occur. The effect of this news on me was similar to that of n The Life of Pin: namely, confusion, a vague sense of betrayal, and a what-the-hell attitude driven by a feeling that the author has cut me loose to believe or not as I see fit.
Because of its experimental nature, I'd put this book on the same shelf with n The Raw Shark Textsn. But my sense is that it's by and for a generation other than mine, and so three stars for it is a stretch.
The first problem was that the two main characters continually behave in a way that defies common sense so drastically that I felt physically uncomfortable. For example, having taken a plane to a random destination (Senegal, as it happens) with no purpose other than to touch down briefly, hand out money to random strangers, and then move on, they find themselves doing stuff like sneaking into a stranger's house to leave flowers (and hopefully not be shot in the process) and trying to tape an envelope full of money to a belligerent goat in the middle of the night.
It may be that I place too much value on money, and rational behavior, so that what they do violates my core principles. But whatever the reason, I want to identify with characters more closely than I could this case.
Extrapolating from what the principal narrator tells us, their undertaking may have been motivated in part by the double trauma of recently losing their mutual best friend in a gruesome highway accident and then being brutally attacked by strangers while clearing out the friend's storage locker. Throughout the narrative he describes the shocked reactions of people when they see his still-battered face, and quite clearly the lingering emotional pain is worse yet.
But when the other main character later steps in to add his perspective, he tells us there WAS no third friend, and no beating. He suggests these elements could simply be efforts "to thicken the plot a bit, to give it some kind of pseudo-emotional gravitas." He complains about the addition of these fictions and the omission of important things that did occur. The effect of this news on me was similar to that of n The Life of Pin: namely, confusion, a vague sense of betrayal, and a what-the-hell attitude driven by a feeling that the author has cut me loose to believe or not as I see fit.
Because of its experimental nature, I'd put this book on the same shelf with n The Raw Shark Textsn. But my sense is that it's by and for a generation other than mine, and so three stars for it is a stretch.