Yes, I realize the rest of the world read this book years ago. I bought it to read, years ago, and then I bought it again, because I’m ADD like that. I finally read it and finished it just a few days ago.
Hated it.
Here’s why: I don’t like feeling manipulated. If I’m going to trust an author enough to momentarily suspend my disbelief for the sake of his story, I expect him to hold that trust sacred. To read 300 pages of a book as an allegory and then, suddenly, be slapped with realistic fiction; that’s not cool.
This author spends thousands of years worth of trust for a cheap trick. In A Winter’s Tale, did I really believe that Hermione fooled anyone in that statue get-up? Of course not, but I went with it, because that’s what Shakespeare asked of me. In a more contemporary example–do I really think Harry Potter plays a fantastical game called Quidditch flying on a broomstick? No, but I wish he really did, and I play along, for the sake of the story and the fun.
But imagine if, in a epilogue, a Shakespearean chorus chastised the audience for being gullible; can’t they SEE that’s a real person, not a statue? Duh! Or if J. K. Rowling, in the last chapter, told her readers “of course Hogwarts isn’t real, you dolts; Harry’s just made it all up in his mind–PSTD, you know. He’ll never escape those abusive Dursleys.”
Or Bobby Ewing wasn’t really dead; Pam was just having a really bad dream.
Give me a fucking break.
Comments 4
Guess I didn’t miss anything by never reading it then. LOL
Posted 08 Jun 2007 at 9:47 am ¶SPOILER ALERT (sort of)
You know, I liked it (but not loved it) up to the last two or three pages. I was even thinking of ordering it for my classroom. I was in a training session with another English teacher the other day and she overheard me mention how PISSED I was at the whole thing and gave me a high-five. I usually trust Booker Award winners, but truly, there was a serious genre shift at the end. You follow the entire second part of the book, totally suspending your disbelief that this boy could survive on a lifeboat with a Bengal tiger, and then, POW, “Oh, didn’t you believe that ending? Here’s a more plausible one,” and he lays you out with a horrifying “reality” ending. Horrifying in terms of what might really go on with survivors on a lifeboat. I guess you’re supposed to “choose” which one you’d rather believe, except it’s apples and oranges, genre-wise.
I think, had he done more foreshadowing, he could have pulled it off. Maybe.
Now I hear they’re making it into a movie.
Posted 08 Jun 2007 at 12:42 pm ¶interesting! I haven’t read the book and was waffling about it. I’m always befuddled by authors who seem to be testing a metafictional construct but don’t bring me along for the ride. “The Amazing Adventures of Cavalier & Klay” was really difficult for me to enjoy for that reason. (I want to pick it up again and see if my resentment blocked enjoyment.)
It seems like cheating to have a twist or a forced moment: isn’t the whole point of reading an entire book that when we’re done, and missing the characters and thinking about them, that we realize something new and subtle in the story?
Posted 08 Jun 2007 at 1:58 pm ¶It was quite disappointing - all the build up meant nothing in the end.
Posted 08 Jun 2007 at 3:04 pm ¶