Go Fug Yourself Book Club discussion

I am not a sci-fi reader, and so I came to this novel (which I read some time ago) with skepticism, But many people who read things I like said good things, and when I picked up the book at B&N and started reading I was blown away by the power of the first few pages so I jumped in. I was not disappointed. This was one of my top 3 books of 2015.

As I mentioned, the first few pages of the book drew me in. Even a year after reading, that opening death is still with me. The butterfly effect of Arthur's death is captivating. His ripples of his death do not create the calamity at the center of the story, but rather how that calamity effects a few people. And how somehow their existences, despite the end of the world, the hunger and thirst, the violence, remains mostly ordinary after they get used to the new normal. Somehow that distinction made this more personal that most dystopian sci-fi I have been exposed to. Its not about the disaster, its about the people. Does that even make sense? I hope so.

So we meet Kirsten at that play, and we know her love of storytelling and of art even as a child, and how that shapes her now that she is part of the Traveling Symphony bringing Shakespeare to the world, connecting people with the best of the past in a world where modern forms of communication are gone. (No one felt the need to preserve Kylie Jenner's tweets after the world begins to end. Shakespeare they fight to keep.) She also fights to keep alive memory of things like the Internet, and also power and medicine and available food, and passes that down, Art keeps the past alive, even when the past is what we have always thought of as the future, and the present what we always imagined as the past, a sort of Cormac McCarthy old west thing.

Kirsten is also obsessed with the comics about Dr. Eleven (Shakespeare and comic books. I found that interesting too.) I had a hard time putting that together initially. Eventually it made sense, as I found out more about Arthur's life, and about Miranda. But there was a period while reading this book when I could not imagine how this was all going to be brought together. It was sort of thrilling when it did coalesce. That was some mighty fine writing! The way Mandel was able to link this little girl with Miranda through the gift of these comics...and how those comics almost foresaw the later disaster...it just blew me away. I never felt it was contrived, it made sense to me. Same with the paramedic/former paparazzo who destroyed and tried to save Arthur at different times. It worked for me. Again, with a lot of writers it would have been too convenient and hokey, but it didn't bug me at all here.

The clash with the Prophet was a little less organic for me, but I understood what she was getting at, so I decided to overlook what I saw as some hiccups in weaving in that storyline. I was satisfied by the story later when it came together, but it was the one thing that took me out of the story even for a moment. In the end though, the art of writing saved the book, and that seems to be the moral of the story. Art is what saves us, makes us human. I don't know that is true, but I hope it is.

I had Station Eleven on my iPad for a long time, and I was really happy you all gave me a reason to finally read it.

I loved this book and yet it pained me as few books have. Mandel does a wonderful job of allowing us to get to know these characters, so the losses, up to and including the pandemic, left me with an almost constant lump in my throat. The decimation of society as we know it is written with such inevitability and finality that I felt like I was grieving while I read. I concluded about halfway through that this was a book about loss.

But as I progressed, I realized that this story was about more than loss -- of love, of identity, of family. It's also about community -- of the way people come together through need and love and art. Society is gone, but people still find each other and create their own societies. I hope I'm making sense.

Interestingly, the two reviews that ran in the New York Times weren't great. True, the story about Arthur's son who became the Prophet was a weak link -- I think it would have been approved if we got to know the boy a little more. But I think those reviews missed the point -- this is not a story about a pandemic but the about the ability of people to come together, even if only for the length of a play.

I AM a scifi reader, and I wouldn't really classify this in that genre - it's more like lightly speculative fiction. But I really enjoyed it. It reminded me a lot of A Canticle for Leibowitz, which I really like. I love all the Shakespeare references, and now I want to read the Dr. Eleven comics!

Yes - the Prophet was definitely the weak link.

I really enjoyed this book, and it is interesting to think about how useless we've become. What sort of hit can society take before everyone who actually knows how to make electricity etc has gone?

I loved this book when I read it last year. I loved it so much I made a book club just to talk about it more.

I agree that the meat of this story is in talking about and ruminating on the then what do you do? What do you do if you know you have a matter of hours left to live? How do the characters who survive carry on? Mandel explores all the options because some don’t, some join the Traveling Symphony (because survival isn’t enough), some relearn what life is like, and some go a little nuts.

I loved when this book turned right when I thought we were going left, and how Mandel doesn’t give her narrators equal space or timing. It helps create a beautiful eerie quality to the book, and heightens the tension because you never know when you’re going to see a character again and if perhaps their story line has reached the end.

The weaknesses of the book have faded for me, while the Prophet was certainly the weak link of the plot I find myself coming back to Miranda on the beach, or Clark in his museum at the airport. The Shakespeare that runs throughout, and the hope and the art.

Yeah, I really loved this book.

I admit to a fascination with post-apocalyptic novels, so this was right up my alley. I thought this book was good, but right after reading it I picked up The Dog Star and was blown away. Highly, highly recommend that book if you haven't read it yet.

Michelle wrote: "I AM a scifi reader, and I wouldn't really classify this in that genre - it's more like lightly speculative fiction. "
Thank you for clarifying this! I don't read SciFi unless it's prescribed to me by someone in a book club, so I got this book with some trepidation, wondering if I would like it. I am not really a fan of the dystopian genre - I read the Katniss Everdeen books (the titles escape me at the moment), but I found the end reallllly depressing. My sister encouraged me to read the Divergent series, but I never felt inclined to pick them up. ANYWAY, that all being said, I really enjoyed this book.

All of the literature and music - the need to perpetuate people's knowledge of significant cultural touchstones - classical music and Shakespeare being their particular brand - resonated with me. I appreciated how not everyone in the symphony enjoyed either classical music OR Shakespeare (the Clarinet, for instance), but they kept at it because they knew it had a great importance.

I enjoyed each of the characters, and would have liked to have seen the Prophet further developed and understand what happened to his mother. I think that would have significantly upgraded his story. Unfortunately, you could see Tyler's evolution in to the Prophet coming a mile away. Had we had more time with him and his mother and more from his perspective, I think the showdown with him and Kirsten would have been that much stronger. I would not have been unhappy to read another 100 pages in order to get a more complete character.

I definitely came away from this book with further proof that I personally need to divest myself of some more THINGS. My IRL book club just read The Poisonwood Bible, which also hammered home just how much STUFF we all have, and how it detracts from actual living. While I don't want to consider living through a pandemic (and I thought the one character's response after living through his entire family's deaths was basically, "Yay? I lived?" which I felt was totally accurate.), I do think that making conscious choices to be present in your life is a really important message. While it might not have been the over-arching message of the book, it was definitely there.

I really appreciate whomever suggested that we read this book. Thanks!

Kris wrote: "All of the literature and music - the need to perpetuate people's knowledge of significant cultural touchstones - classical music and Shakespeare being their particular brand - resonated with me."

This, seriously. That part about how the age of electricity had come and gone and people where still performing Shakespeare (paraphrasing since I don't have the book on-hand) still gives me chills...I'm an English major so I obviously have a biased opinion of the importance of the arts (and Shakespeare) but there is just something so essentially human about art. It makes me want to cry, in a good way.

I didn't love this book, but I didn't hate it either. I think my problem was that, to me, it seemed like that author was a constant background presence, delivering some plot devices rather ham-handedly - promising depth, but never delivering. Already mentioned was the Prophet, but also the tattoos. Jeevan and his brother. Even the members of the troupe - the randomness of Kirsten's attachment to or detachment from people didn't make any sense to me. I'm not sure what I was looking for, but I came away feeling like I was missing something from each of the characters...because the author deliberately chose to do it that way.

Jessica wrote: "Kris wrote: "All of the literature and music - the need to perpetuate people's knowledge of significant cultural touchstones - classical music and Shakespeare being their particular brand - resonat..."

I am probably also biased, but this rang very true for me in the best way. Art is also how we remember our history, so it unites and informs.

Katie wrote: "I loved when this book turned right when I thought we were going left,..."

That's a great way to put it!

With the several mentions of Kirsten not remembering the first year I was really concerned that we were going to get an "I remember everything" line, and it's really much stronger not knowing what caused the scar on her face etc.

I read an interview with the author where she said that her original draft did not include the follow-up scene with Jeevan and his new family. Her original intention for the character was to have him "vanish" into the brave new world, just as you would expect to have happen in a real epidemic. I believe it was her editor who recommended bringing him back for some closure.

Peggy wrote: "I read an interview with the author where she said that her original draft did not include the follow-up scene with Jeevan and his new family. Her original intention for the character was to have h..."

I think that was good advice on the editor's part. For some reason, I wanted to know what happened with Javeen more than almost anyone else (with the possible exception of Miranda. I get Mandel's reasoning about him vanishing into the world, but we had seen so much of him, and he presided over the death of the man who was the connection between these characters. I needed to know how he fared.

Karen wrote: "Peggy wrote: "I read an interview with the author where she said that her original draft did not include the follow-up scene with Jeevan and his new family. Her original intention for the character..."

I think I agree. I see how Mandel saw the non-resolution as more authentic, and she may be right. But as a reader, while I don't want everything tied up i a bow, I think there needs to be some little shred of resolution to make for a satisfying read.

I think there are enough people who just disappear without making Javeen one of them.

I also really appreciated the diversity of the characters in the book. It was noticeable without being tokenistic box-ticking.

Alicia wrote: "I think there are enough people who just disappear without making Javeen one of them.

I also really appreciated the diversity of the characters in the book. It was noticeable without being tokenistic box-ticking."

I agree with that, completely.

And, I'm glad we got some resolution with Javeen, as well, though I thought we would somehow see all of them come full circle. I guess that would have been a bridge too far, though. (Perhaps, literally, in this world!)

Amy wrote: "I didn't love this book, but I didn't hate it either. I think my problem was that, to me, it seemed like that author was a constant background presence, delivering some plot devices rather ham-hand..."

With you--was prepared to love given all the raves, but I feel like the threads didn't all hold together. I don't think the comics really paid off given how threaded they were throughout, and I also agree that The Prophet was underdeveloped. Frankly, he could have existed as an interesting character without necessarily needing to be tied back to Arthur. You can definitely imagine that in the wake of a great disaster, there'd be all kinds of religious fundamentalists gripping the imaginations of followers.

I also didn't find Arthur that compelling to hang the story around--the Indian guy (Javeen?--it's been a couple of months since I read it) who jumped on stage and Kristen were both way more interesting to me. I can't recall his name, but the guy at the airport who collects the museum of civilization also was a great character; that section was melancholy in just the way I love (the image of the plane on the tarmac that no one ever goes near and the idea that people got trapped on there...a very lasting image).

It took me a while to read the book; I felt like word-for-word, page-by-page it was beautifully written but the plot didn't really drive me forward, which is weird for something in this genre, which normally has a very propulsive beat. I find this the case with a lot of MFA-style contemporary fiction--good writing but plotting is off.

This was one of my favorite books I read last year. I agreed with many of you that it was impressive how (most of) the pieces came together. I didn't really care for Jeevan's story, but I did appreciate getting a conclusion, if his character had to be included. Also agree that it was a little slow to start.

I like a good post-apocalyptic speculation story, and I enjoyed that this didn't focus on bold leaders trying to rebuild civilization, but instead showed the beginning stages of after the end. I loved the museum and the general attitude towards artifacts - how they, too, were transformed in purpose by the fall. It was like building an archaeology, from the other side.

I've had this book on my Nook for a while and finally got around to reading it. I love how the author doesn't see the need to tie up all the loose ends. We never know what happened to Elizabeth or what happened in Kirsten's lost year. This book was beautiful and lyrical.

I agree with Tricia. I thought this was an excellent book. It showed the trials of certain people and how each--as individual and as a group were handling the new life. This included new skills, but also trying to recapture old skills. How news was spread by wanderers, and much was rumor, but what if? I thought the author covered a lot of territory without weighing the reader down with too much of the everyday happenings. Large swaths of each characters life were not included and not needed. Very enjoyable.

Susan wrote: "I agree with Tricia. I thought this was an excellent book. It showed the trials of certain people and how each--as individual and as a group were handling the new life. This included new skills, bu..."

I loved that this was character driven. I don't read a lot of post-apocalyptic fare, but most of what I have read is focused on events, rather than how people respond to these events. I don't much care about technology or superheroes; for me the psychology is what is interesting.

Yes. Exactly.