21st Century Literature discussion

This is to discuss the second half of the book. Let's be careful with spoilers early in the month.

I found this to be an odd "sketch" of a book. While it was tightly, even intricately plotted, there are so many gaps in the story that it is like looking at one of those drawings where three or four lines suggest a woman lying on her side. It seems that almost as much is left for the reader to fill in as is supplied. I found that sort of unsatisfying when I first finished the book, but I'm still thinking about it.

Peter wrote: "I found that sort of unsatisfying when I first finished the book, but I'm still thinking about it."

That was my reaction as well. It really made me reconsider what makes a book feel rewarding. If I'm still chewing over a story several weeks afterward, there's obviously a satisfaction to be had that belies my initial reaction to the end. It's an uncomfortable tension to be sure -- I still don't know how to process the ending -- but I ultimately found reading this book to be an incredibly rewarding experience.

Peter and Daniel, I also found that this book stayed with me for a long time. I even went back and changed my star rating from 3 to 4 because it just kept tickling my mind.

Linda, I read the NYT review you posted in the first half of the discussion, and two points struck me.

First was how Walter was able to make correlations between the most obtuse segments of data. I loved how this was presented in the novel--especially the moral and ethical issues presented by the program--but I never, as Coupland did, tied it to the characters of the novel. The stories are really worlds apart, and yet there are the most unlikely correlations to be made. So obvious, yet I missed it entirely.

The second was Coupland's rhetorical question of whether "being a writer in 2012 means needing to be able to write in multiple genres, as do Kunzru, David Mitchell et al., but not as some sort of post­modern party trick. It’s more a statement of fact about the early-21st-century condition. Genre shifting is as fundamental to working with words as is punctuation and knowing the difference between serifs and sans-serifs." Genre shifting is a great way of describing what Kunzru is doing here. Thinking in that way also helps me frame why I have difficulties pinning this novel down: it's always shifting, always in motion.

Linda, thanks for posting the link to the Coupland review. It is really nice to have a list of all of the "not-2008" chapters.

I enjoyed the novel more and more as it went on. I was underwhelmed by the first couple of 2008 chapters, but the other chapters and their links seemed to strengthen these. The whole book seemed full of resonances that were not too firmly inked in -- sketches, as you say, Peter.

For me, the space this left was exhilarating, and I'm happy that many of the dots aren't quite connected by the novel's end. For me, the novel almost was these unmade connections, or at least it rested on them. It allowed room for uncertainty, for a number of possibilities. How much of the stuff about Ashtar Galactic Command, Coyote, Walter, was completely unfounded? I'm very happy not to have been told, to be left with a plausibility to both 'none' and 'all', and most points between.

What did everyone make of Walter?

I saw an awful lot of Euclid from Darren Aronofsky's film 'Pi' in Walter's pedigree. Euclid may have been even more at home in GWM than Walter. Euclid took bunches of disparate information and processed it to make accurate stock predictions, as well as to discover the name of God, heralding the coming of the messianic age.

One of the things I find interesting about this book is that it takes a lot of very fringe ideas and treats them with an unusual amount of consideration. Oddly it is the characters whose world view is most conventional who most suffer in this book. What did everyone make of that?

Good shout, Whitney. Definitely shades of Pi.

At one point I started to feel that Walter was being represented as definitely being able to do things that I don't believe are possible, but the book veered away from this to leave it open-ended, which I thought was exactly where it should be. We are left to wonder how much of what Walter was purported to be able to do was real, and what kind of effects it really did have on the world, if any.

Strangely, for me personally, this makes me feel more that there is a chance it could have been capable of the things claimed, not less. If it had been pushed in my face I would have resisted. Dangle it on the edge, and I'm curious. The interconnectedness of everything idea reminds me of several of Douglas Adams' ideas.

Deborah wrote: "One of the things I find interesting about this book is that it takes a lot of very fringe ideas and treats them with an unusual amount of consideration. Oddly it is the characters whose world view..."

Actually, I kept feeling like Jaz was one of the few characters that Kunzru really had any empathy for. I picked up a certain level of disdain for characters like the young Joanie with her neglect of her child and her bright-eyed beliefs in the alien cult. The endless litany of their pseudo-scientific equipment and philosophy left me feeling like Kunzru was shooting fish in a barrel and reveling in it.

I got the same vibe regarding Lisa. There is sympathy offered, but it seemed more like lip service. Jaz mentions how she is stuck at home with Raj all day, but the burden of having a severely disabled child was expressed more expertly as it affected Jaz. Jaz got the ‘show’, while Lisa got the ‘tell’. The same disdain for her pseudo-spiritualism came through as well.

Whitney wrote: "The endless litany of their pseudo-scientific equipment and philosophy left me feeling like Kunzru was shooting fish in a barrel and reveling in it."

Love this.

I also felt the same way about Jaz in terms of Kunzru's empathy. He was certainly the character I had the most empathy for, even if I did want to smack him out of his obliviousness every now and then. Out of all the characters, Jaz is also the one who had me asking most often what I would do in the same situation. That's the larger part of empathy, to be sure, but I spent a lot of time actively reflecting on it.

Taking it from that point, the people who suffer are also the ones for whom I have the most empathy. Is that just because my world view is conventional? A curious question. But Kunzru does gain a lot of ground by sympathizing with fringe elements. I like how Terry describes the open-ended subtleness as an inducer of curiosity. That fits my reaction as well.

Based on this one book, I don't get the impression that Kunzru really thinks all that well of women. They tend to come off as irrational and overly emotional.

Peter, do you think he treats the men much better? I did not sense a gender bias.

Terry, I think, ultimately, it was the unconnected dots and the space left for the reader that caused me to like the book, but I do not think I realized that until this discussion.

And Deborah, your observation that the author treating the fringe ideas (and presumably the characters associated with them) with consideration (which I take to be similar to respect), while having characters with more conventional ideas suffer more, rings true with me. I think that keeps the reader, or at this this reader, more on edge, wondering what is going on and how is this going to turn out.

He certainly treats Jaz better.

I'm falling more on the Peter interpretation, now that it's been brought up. The woman are more irrational, grasping at an easier, trendy kind of of spiritualism. Lisa actually starts getting hysterical whenever Jaz tries to explore what really happened in the desert, although that is mixed in with an element of guilt on her part. The more level-headed Laila is an exception.

It's the men in the book who experience more ecstatic, perhaps more authentic revelations. At least they're the ones who see the spaceships / visions/ angels. And I think having a character suffer tends to indicate more respect for that character from a writer, not less. Suffering usually indicates a level of complexity.

Your probably right. After all, I'm the person who thought she could be a major league shortstop if she were just a better athlete, not appreciating that there were no women actually playing on any major league team. Yeah, I finally realized that only boys can make it to the show but I still sometimes just fail to see the obvious.

Peter wrote: "Based on this one book, I don't get the impression that Kunzru really things all that well of women. They tend to come off as irrational and overly emotional."

To a point. I thought Nicky was by far the more irrational and overly emotional character from his chapters. Recalling minor names from the audiobook is difficult, but the wife of the linguist strikes me as the stronger character of the two as well. And as Whitney pointed out, Laila is definitely an exception.

There is definitely something unsettling about his treatment of Lisa, though. Whitney, I like your description of "grasping at an easier, trendy kind of spiritualism." It captures the exact point where I began to feel distanced from Lisa's character.

I think the point when I began to dislike Lisa was when she took away the charm that Raj liked having around his neck. Even if she thought it was garbage, he liked it, and it wasn't hurting anything. By not wanting it anywhere near him, she seemed to be giving it some kind of power and negative influence.

Casceil wrote: "I think the point when I began to dislike Lisa was when she took away the charm that Raj liked having around his neck."

I was surprised she reacted like this. Methinks you doth protest too much? Or was her explosive reaction more to do with how she felt about Jaz's background and the way she perceived his parents felt about her?

Some of Lisa's reaction against the charm may have come from her feeling about Jaz's background, and her perception of how his parents saw her. Maybe she felt like the parents viewed her as part of the "evil" the charm was meant to keep away. But her reaction still seemed irrational.

Casceil wrote: "Some of Lisa's reaction against the charm may have come from her feeling about Jaz's background, and her perception of how his parents saw her. Maybe she felt like the parents viewed her as part o..."

Yeah, I think this was the moment I started to lose sympathy with her as well. It was pretty obnoxious. And when not getting hysterical about someone else's voodoo, she was getting hysterical about Jaz daring to question any of her preferred voodoo. Mind you, being stuck in a house day in and day out taking care of Raj could make anyone buggy, but I think that could have been explored better as a factor in her desperation.

Whitney, I love your comment: " And when not getting hysterical about someone else's voodoo, she was getting hysterical about Jaz daring to question any of her preferred voodoo."

So very human!

Actually, although I don't much care for this author's work I am struck - again and again - by his incredible insights into human nature.

Now that I've finished this book I'm very tempted to read it again; it's like a mosaic that's been imperfectly put back together.

And I'm intrigued to know what happens next! So, yes, I'm going to be reflecting on this book for some time yet to come.

I love the mosaic imagery. It makes me think of a kaleidoscope where you get different Rorschach type images depending on your perspective. A wonderful mental springboard for how to process the novel as a whole!

"... a kaleidoscope where you get different Rorschach type images depending on your perspective" is even better!

I love the way we keep finding better ways to say "not clear (some kind of puzzle?), but interesting to puzzle over."

*smiling*

On that note, I've given myself time to puzzle over the connections and I've come to the conclusion that I just don't see how they really matter. The comparisons to Cloud Atlas have been discussed already, and I agree with other people's comments that they are superficial. (Disclaimer: Cloud Atlas is one of my favorite books, so I may be setting the bar too high.)

I thought Cloud Atlas did an amazing job using the connections between time periods to convey the interconnectivity of people, and a sort of unchangeable human spirit no matter the time or situation. In Gods WIthout Men, the connections left me pondering, but I didn't find any particular meaning in them. Was Raj the glowing boy who led Judy away in a previous time period? Maybe, but so what if he was? I had similar 'so what' reactions to most the other connections.

I thought the different literary styles used for the different time periods in Cloud Atlas were amazingly well done. Kunzru attempted some of the same things, but his prose never dazzled me. It wasn't bad writing, but. except for a few impressive turns of phrases here and there, I found it mostly adequate to the task and not much more.

I enjoyed Gods Without Men for the most part, but found it disappointing. One of those books that seemed to promise more than it delivered.

I do think the connections matter, if only as a sequence of connections to the place. It's as though the pinnacles have some kind of supernatural pull, as a "sacred place" or a place that draws people, particularly people with some kind of mission. One special thing about the place is that unattended children vanish for long periods of time. It's a place that people can be very attached to, like the guy who lives in the bunker so many decades.

There are things about Lisa that are so obvious to me that I feel like stating them is silly. But of course, where we go with a book has a lot to do with what we bring to a book. She hates Jaz I think The deal with the pendant comes down to that - she hates him. She hates him because things have turned out so badly, and she has no one else to hate. So, she hates him and she hates his family. Jaz cannot win with her.

I think this book is uneven in many ways. There are places where it's better than others. The first half felt like a collection of short stories.

I didn't read Cloud Atlas. Now I wish I had. I cannot compare them.

I did read A Visit From the Goon Squad. I found Gods Without Men similar in many ways. In the end I think Fagan does a better job of closing the circle (not a reference to that book we read a couple of months ago, I swear) but I liked Gods Without Men better. I felt more invested in this book.

Casceil wrote: "I do think the connections matter, if only as a sequence of connections to the place. It's as though the pinnacles have some kind of supernatural pull, as a "sacred place" or a place that draws p..."

I don't disagree with any of that. It's a mystical place, that people with needs are drawn to. And the (somewhat on-the-nose) mythical tale at the beginning indicated that this was going to be an 'ancient place of mysticism meets modern day concerns' kind of tale. But, again, I'm left with "so what?". Is there a larger point, or is it just "here's a magical place that people are attracted to it, even if they don't understand its power. It can heal autistic kids, and provide visions for seekers"?

While the tale of coyote cooking meth set the tone, I felt like the penultimate line was the summary: "for that which is infinite is known only to itself and cannot be contained in the mind of man." Which I find unsatisfying. Basically, a "there are more things in heaven and earth, just accept it" message.

I'm generally a fan of the kind of book that leaves you pondering just what the heck was going on. I can't really express very clearly why some of them leave me with a sense of wonder and the feeling that the universe is wider than imagined, and some of them just don't work, or at worst feel contrived. As far as larger picture themes, this one goes in the 'not really wowed, mind not expanded' category.

Deborah wrote: "There are things about Lisa that are so obvious to me that I feel like stating them is silly. But of course, where we go with a book has a lot to do with what we bring to a book. She hates Jaz I th..."

Well, sure, it's obvious now that you say it! This rings completely true. A lot of marriages don't survive these kind of issues, mainly because there's a lot of unspoken guilt and accusations. But why do you think her disdain for Jaz continued beyond Raj's miraculous improvement? Were things just too broken at that point?

I missed Cloud Atlas, too, Deborah. Maybe someday we can set up a buddy read for it over on YLTO.

It's a plan.

I did not see a resemblance between this book and Cloud Atlas or The Good Squad. I liked this one better than either of those but not sure exactly why. Perhaps it is just how open the author leaves it for the reader to make whatever connections the reader sees. And different readers may see different connections. There are certainly lots of wierd and interesting things to spark discussion!

Whitney wrote: "A lot of marriages don't survive these kind of issues, mainly because there's a lot of unspoken guilt and accusations. But why do you think her disdain for Jaz continued beyond Raj's miraculous improvement? Were things just too broken at that point? "

I think Raj opened a hairline crack that was always there (as it is in most relationships) which evolved into a fissure - long before he disappeared...

It's hardly surprising that she came to openly despise him; particularly when Jaz thought Raj wasn't their son. Thereafter the couple's differing explanations for what had happened at the Pinnacle Rocks was the catalyst for the inevitable breakdown of their relationship. They were left peering into the void that had been their marriage.

Sophia wrote: "I think Raj opened a hairline crack that was always there (as it is in most relationships) which evolved into a fissure - long before he disappeared..."

My initial response was to declare that I didn't see any cracks before Raj's birth, but when recalling facts to defend my position I quickly realized it to be indefensible. The cultural differences alone were stress points, not to mention the day-to-day struggles of any relationship.

Deborah, I also like your point about Jaz not being able to win with Lisa, but I also appreciated how, in his particular situation, he couldn't really win with anyone. How can you explain your suspicions of alien abduction without sounding insane or paranoid? It's a delicious tension -- even more so since we have no idea whether the alien/mystical/spiritual angle is true or not.

It's a mystery... (!)

Well, I only finished this book now, man.. Was it a chore. Haven't read a book that was such a chore in a looooong time.

I totally didn't understand what was going on :/ maybe you guys got at least a little bit more..? I mean.. what the hell happened, even? What about the ending? Nothing happens.. It's not even clear what chemical problem there is.. (Coyote blew up his meth lab or something..?).. And how do the tales about the Friar even connect with the story at all?

I'm totally lost. Although I guess, that's how this book is lifelike - it goes, it goes and goes and goes on, and never really gets anywhere. It gives off the idea that it's going somewhere, but same as with life - it doesn't have a definite direction. Never really gets anywhere. Maybe that was part of the point?

To me it feels like an unfinished book a little bit, though.