Literary Fiction by People of Color discussion

It's December 1, the starting date for our LFPC discussion of We the Animals: A novel by Justin Torres. Columbus will be our discussion leader this month. Here's a little biographical information about this debut author:

Justin Torres was raised in upstate New York. His work has appeared in Granta, Tin House, and Glimmer Train. A graduate of the Iowa Writers' Workshop, he was the recipient of a Rolón Fellowship in Literature from United States Artists and is a Wallace Stegner Fellow at Stanford. Among many other things, he has worked as a farmhand, a dog walker, a creative writing teacher, and a bookseller.

Here's the New York Times review of this book:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/25/boo...

Here's a written interview with Torres:

http://electricliterature.com/blog/20...

And here's a link to an interview on NPR's The Diane Rehm Show:

http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/201...

Happy reading!

I just finished. It was impressive and wow'd me. Can't wait to discuss and see what others think.

I will be in on this conversation late (as per usual, lol). I am still a ways down in the library queue.

I will be purchasing the book today and hopefully I can start on it this weekend.

I'm halfway through this collection. My first impression is to love the strong, poetic writing, but I think I may want to give it a second, closer reading during our discussion. Something about it makes me uncomfortable, but I'm not sure what.

Those contemplating reading the book, please know it's only 125 pages long and can easily be read in a single sitting or two - if desired.

Mistinguettes wrote: "I'm halfway through this collection. My first impression is to love the strong, poetic writing, but I think I may want to give it a second, closer reading during our discussion. Something about it..."

Really curious to hear your thoughts, Mistinguettes.

Looking forward to this discussion!

I hope to pick up this week at the library.

Just finished it. I'd love to hear what everyone else thought.

ETA: I'm new to the group. Should we give our impressions now, or wait for more members to finish the book?

Columbus wrote: "Those contemplating reading the book, please know it's only 125 pages long and can easily be read in a single sitting or two - if desired."

I was surprised by how short it is. I'll probably finish this book in no time once I actually start reading it.

interesting. very much so at times, but I found the transitions rather too abrupt at the end. not sure how I feel about it as a whole at the moment.

Quite a bit of family drama packed in these few pages. Even when they sre deleriously happy there is an under current of dread and foreboding. You wait for the other shoe to drop and it usually does. I like books like this where and economy of words manage to deliver vivid imagery and realistic emotions. Every family member except perhaps Joel was fully drawn. The changing dynamics, maturation, and palpable tensions between the family were easily conveyed. Sort of like a boxers lethal jab, these short stories left quite an impression.

I will come back once I start reading the book, trying to finish "The Resurrection of Nat Turner" by Sharon Ewell Foster.

I know there's quite a few of you still reading the book, but because of the short, novella-length size of this book, you'll be able to catch up in no time. So, feel free to jump in when you can.

I loved this book! The short chapters, stories or vignettes or whatever you choose to call them, is powerfully written and continuously builds and builds into a most original (some I know have said strange and weird) book.  An autobiographical tour-de-force in grand prose with an emotional bite that builds and builds, not quite certain where its headed, but with a quiet intensity that's jarring at times. 

What is your initial impression of Torres' prose, the way the book is written --the unusual style,  your opinion of the autobiographical first novel that some say is quickly going out of favor in the literary world  and lastly your impression of the book title.

Fire away! 

also share some of Mistinguette's views (Mistinguettes wrote: ".. My first impression is to love the strong, poetic writing, but I think I may want to give it a second, closer reading during our discussion. Something about it..." )
I have some ambivalence at well. have read two or three, sometimes four pieces in a sitting. thinking about how much meaning is conveyed in so few words; thinking that it's beautiful and rich and poetic but almost at the edge of too beautiful, too studied. have about three more to read and agree that it would be probably helpful in some ways to re-read after a week or so. I love that we're reading it at any rate. Despite my ambivalence, find myself thinking about these people, this family and am more glad than not to be reading and made aware of the tensions, the love (is that was it is) and the forces that bind these people to one another. as well, of course, as the larger context in which they're living, if you pan away from the close-up/up close dynamics and remember who and where everyone is.

Janet wrote: "also share some of Mistinguette's views (Mistinguettes wrote: ".. My first impression is to love the strong, poetic writing, but I think I may want to give it a second, closer reading during our di..."

Good morning, Janet!

"too beautiful, too studied." I was wondering if you care to expound on this statement a little further. If I'm not mistaken Torres is a product of one of the fancy writing schools (Iowa?) and I know some have insinuated, fairly or unfairly, that the writing from some of the former students can be recognized for its sameness, that the writing is almost mechanical-like at times. Just curious what you meant.

thanks, Columbus, for asking . I've been thinking about that element of discomfort, but also wondering about Mistinguettes' and my own other discomfort about things about the mother, her / the dad's sexuality that the boys are exposed to. part of that maybe is me being too prudish, too worried about them and wondering if the boys came to understand their parents' sexuality in some adult way as they grew up.
but to your comment, it feels like the writing itself is so rich, so studied that it's *almost* too lovely. doesn't feel at all mechanical to me, as much as styled, don't know how to articulate.
thinking about the good, the lovely and the ugly things that happen and that the boys do (spoiler alert: a 'bitch's' life is threatened with a sharp stick) - there's that raw energy and everyone is hurtful to everyone and yet there's a power to it in the aggregate as well.
not sure if I've clarified or muddied...?

Not quite done reading. I find the lyrical, descriptive prose poem style familiar, (and not unlike my own writing). I enjoyed the tension between the lush and sensuous descriptiveness and the painful situations described: we can see beauty in even the rawest and most terrifying of moments. I am not sure if this is a novella, a series of linked short stories, or a series of prose poems that tell a story. For some reason that I can't yet articulate, this matters to me.

The thing I'm uncomfortable with is how close these characters come to stereotype. Thinking a lot about Columbus' question about the title, and find I am mentally comparing this to Dorothy Allison's autobiographical "Trash" as I read this. I have not encountered voices of poor, neglected children that embrace the slur "animals" as an identity before. Not sure how I feel about it. Want to finish reading before I say more about this.

Margie wrote: "Just finished it. I'd love to hear what everyone else thought.

ETA: I'm new to the group. Should we give our impressions now, or wait for more members to finish the book?"

Hello Margie,  

Feel free to share your overall thoughts and impression of the book now if you like. We typically forewarn the group with a -Spoiler Alert - notification if there's a part of the plot we intend to reveal to prevent spoiling it for others. I think that is especially the case for this book. Thanks for bringing that up.

Mistinguettes wrote: "Not quite done reading. I find the lyrical, descriptive prose poem style familiar, (and not unlike my own writing). I enjoyed the tension between the lush and sensuous descriptiveness and the pai..."

Interesting, Mistinguettes (about the slur)   I never really thought about that. I hope you would elaborate more on that once you've finished the book. Anyone else have an opinion on this? Would you consider this a case of Torres being afforded the right to use "animals" describing his own vs someone else using it?   Funny, you never really think closely about these things until it's brought up in another situation.  Last night, while watching a piece on the actor, Antonio Fargas,  his  Jewish acting instructor "complimented" him on his acting skills from his early stage days and described him or his features as - and  I paraphrase - resembling an "aristocratic horse" or something like that. The instructor was undoubtably paying homage to his acting abilities in his comments, or, - made a valiant attempt to  - but, that description made me wonder if I would have given it a second thought if I hadn't just read your comment. Interesting.

I read this book in one sitting when it was first released in August. I read the book after listening to the Diane Rehm interview with the author. The interview helped but several things in place for me while reading.

I enjoyed the dark lyrical language.
My initial thoughts on the format and language after reading were:
• The language and wording was just beautiful despite describing a household that was intense, chaotic and loud – this was managed by the controlled tone of the narrator
• The intensity of the mood/emotions swings within the dynamics of this family was breathtaking – that love/hurt that they inflicted on each other, being part of a group/yet being an outsider, accepting that pain is part of growing up makes you wonder if these individuals would ever be whole.
• The book is very short – less than 150 pages but feels much fuller because the writing style
• While the author said this was not autobiographical – there are similarities and I thought writing this book was probably cathartic to him

After reading a recent article in the Writer magazine - on "flash" novels I would say that this book falls into that category. According to the article - a flash novel is a breakout genre conceived to tell a large-scope story in a compact space. The flash novel does a lot of storytelling in a little space.

We the Animals falls into the same space as two other books I read this year - The Buddha In the Attic by Julie Otsuka and Train Dreams by Denis Johnson. Books that said a whole lot in a small number of pages but stayed with me long after I read the last page.

I loved the writing in this book. I thought it was beautifully dark and wonderfully edgy. It gave me a sense of the chaotic environment of the family and the intensity of their lives. The book also made me think of what it means to be free in but at the same time confined to your circumstance. I thought the book was brillant until the last few chapters. They almost seemed tacked on-- a departure from rather than a part of the rest of the book. I am interested in what other people thought of the ending in relation to the rest of the book.

Taida wrote: "The book also made me think of what it means to be free in but at the same time confined to your circumstance. "

What a juicy observation, Taida! Would you say more about what you meant, and where you saw this in the book?

Beverly wrote: "I read this book in one sitting when it was first released in August. I read the book after listening to the Diane Rehm interview with the author. The interview helped but several things in place f..."

Beverly, thanks for sharing your thoughts. I was not familiar with the "flash" novel at all, but certainly Animals would fall into that category. Beautifully written prose with an economy of words.  Amazing how much you can get with so few words. And, I agree, I think this novel will leave an impression as well.

Taida wrote: "I loved the writing in this book. I thought it was beautifully dark and wonderfully edgy. It gave me a sense of the chaotic environment of the family and the intensity of their lives. The book also..."

Without going into detail and spoiling it for others, I actually liked the ending to this book. In fact, the last several chapters were the most enjoyable for me. It seems so many authors experience difficulty with their endings and you come to expect sloppy closings. Not the case for this one.

(Spoiler) .....I thought it culminated horrifically albeit realistically and made sense for me.

Most of this novel is written in first person plural with a most unusual, unnamed narrator. What did you think of the authors decision to keep the narrator unnamed and what did you make of this youngest boy? What about his relationship with the other boys and his mother?

Columbus wrote: "Most of this novel is written in first person plural with a most unusual, unnamed narrator. What did you think of the authors decision to keep the narrator unnamed and what did you make of this you..."

I actually liked the technique that the narrator was unnamed. For me it gave a more "intimate" feel as this speaking directly to me as if we are speaking together then I know who you are. It was also prepared me for the separation of the narrator from the rest of the family. The narrator and the his brothers started out as "we" and as the unnamed narrator got older he became an "I" and the brothers became a "they"

Also thought that by the narrator being unnamed made his a more "universal" character. As the narrator became "different" from what was expected by other family member (and the outside world)he became an "Everyman" to readers in similar circumstances.

Beverly was the we, they, I. translation very noticeable. I appreciate your recognizing it. I didn't even notice.

I'm almost done and I feel that I'm waiting for the point that makes the story come together for me. I'm thinking the ending must be "it" since I'm almost done. I can say that from what I've read, I'm not in love with it.

I was on the fence with this book. Although the writing is wonderfully descriptive, and the vignettes were interesting, it was too disjointed. I kept wondering where it was going. And that was enough to keep me from truly enjoying the novel.

I pushed through, only to be floored by the conclusion. It was too abrupt for me, and felt a bit contrived. I have to agree with Taida when she said, "They almost seemed tacked on-- a departure from rather than a part of the rest of the book."

Mistinguettes wrote: What a juicy observation, Taida! Would you say more about what you meant..."


As I was thinking about this book, and I have to say that at first I was not sure if I liked it because I disliked the ending so much, it seem to me to say many things about freedom and constraint. These brothers, due to their parents work schedule, were largely left on their own to be, become, and do what they wanted. For example, the incident of smashing produce on the kitchen table is the example that comes quickly to mind. However the space in which the brothers emerge is one that is defined by inconsistent income, sometimes abusive and sometimes loving parents (parents mostly abusive to each other), and a collapsing of identity. I guess what I am really thinking through is how Torres, I believe, brillantly showed us the intensity of this juxtaposition--what it means to be free in a confined environment.

So that is what I was talking about but I am still thinking through this very short book which has so much to offer.

I don't think the ending was tacked on at all...I think almost everything in the book led up to that devastating ending (although to tell the truth though I'm still not sure of the specifics, I'm sure that its not a happy one). There were clues to it placed throughout the book. Especially in a really short and ominous chapter when the father was commenting on how beautiful his youngest son was. That was the beginning of a sense of dread I had for the narrator's well being that was realized in the final chapters

After finishing the book, I found myself contemplating the well written vignettes, analyzing the story, considering the clues that were there all along. I do think it is a bit disjointed, and at first impression, I found that to be the beauty of it—the lack of continuity duplicating the family. After a couple of days of the story being on my mind though, I began to feel a bit differently, as if I were at a party, in the middle of a great conversation, went to grab a glass of wine, and at my return the conversation had rapidly progressed, and I was left wandering if what was said in my absence was the “true grit”.

William wrote: "I don't think the ending was tacked on at all...I think almost everything in the book led up to that devastating ending."

I too had this sense of a devastating ending but I was still jarred by the execution of it. I do not want to give spoilers and I do not think this is one but what had seemed a series of vignettes that progressed towards a potentially horrific ending, all of a sudden took me out of one sense of time and space and placed me in another. I felt the need for more of a transition or a longer book. As it was I felt confused and uncertain what was happening and when it was happening.

I still loved it though because it had me thinking about it and its characters long after I read it.

Just downloaded this to my Kindle this morning. I have a crazy week coming up, but I hope to read and jump in soon!

I'm hesitant to talk about the book as a whole to prevent spoilers, yet I really want to ask this related question: What do you think of the author's depictions of gender?

There is lots about how boys learn masculinity in this story. (Its tender descriptions of learning to be hard remind me of many of the narrators in Junot Diaz' Drown.)

We are introduced to Paps as muy macho, who can mambo and also cook; yet in the following stories "Seven" and "The Lake" we see the narrator learning to despise emotional neediness as traditionally feminine and overwhelming, and his attempts at affection as a clumsy, brutal introduction to manhood.

Old Man in "Other Locusts" is one of the few other glimpses of adult men in the narrators world: he both calls the brothers animals, but also feeds their several kinds hunger.

So what does it mean, to Joel, Manny and the narrator, to become a man?

I just finished this book last night.

The word that comes to mind for me is dreamscape. Its like I was reading these flashes of the young narrators dreams - everything tempered with his own perceptions, his dreamy nature, the beautiful, tight and spare writing. How can one fit such a story into such small spaces?

The ending was beyond tragic to me. I was so hurt. And, yet - that poor boy was a product, wasn't he?

The unnamed narrator made me think of The Lover, another semi-autobiographical book with an unnamed narrator. It has the same quality to it as well.

To answer the question about the gender depictions, I think it was rather stereotypical, but stereotypes ground in some form of truth. The mother was tragic, beautiful, abused, wanting her "babies" back. Paps was macho, a real man, but at the same time, I was almost in tears at the end reading about ***SPOLIER*** him bathing his son for the last time.

A great book. I am glad I read it.

***SPOILER*** Well, I never got the impression that the father ever rejected his son. there's another point when he's watching the son dance and he remarks how astonishing it is he has such a pretty son. it's clear what he meant by that, but it didn't feel aimed at his son to injure, not to me when reading the first time anyway.I see William took the same scene very differently, so perhaps I'm wrong. Of course, the the other two brothers are protective of him. There are things I like a great deal about the book, but the major issues at the end unfold too quickly for my taste. still, it's interesting reading everyone else's comments.

George wrote: "***SPOILER*** Well, I never got the impression that the father ever rejected his son. there's another point when he's watching the son dance and he remarks how astonishing it is he has such a prett..."

Interesting. How do the rest of you view the narrarators relationship with his father? Did you pick up any clues or see signs along the way that the father viewed his son in any particular way?

William wrote: "I don't think the ending was tacked on at all...I think almost everything in the book led up to that devastating ending (although to tell the truth though I'm still not sure of the specifics, I'm s..."

I agree with you I do not think that the ending was tacked on or abrupt. This family lived on the edge just wanting for a crisis - they came and went and each time one happened they exhaled. It happened so much it was normal for them,like breathing. But, this is how it is for families in similar situations - things happen and then there is a defining moment. For the narrator after this incident which everything changes for him.

Approaching the mid-point of this book discussion and it really appears many of you are anxious to discuss the latter part of this book - and the ending in particular. But, before we go there, I would like to know what you think of the questions posed by Mistinguettes in posting #37? They are rather thought provoking and after reading various interviews with the author, it really seems they get to the heart and soul of what Torres is trying to convey here. 

A.) What do you think of the author's depictions of gender? 

B.) So what does it mean, to Joel, Manny and the narrator, to become a man? 

Do you feel Torres is reinforcing some stereotypes here? 

On a personal front, some of the tender moments by the father, or, moments where the father becomes more affectionate, appears antithetical to the experiences many of my Latino friends have expressed to me about the male figures in their family - particularly their fathers. Obviously,this is not true of all, but the characters in Junot Díaz  Drown and even the male figure's in Dagoberto Gilb's The Flowers are certainly examples.

Please let me know what you think.  

interesting - I'd read the 'tacked on' comment but then when I picked up the book to finish reading last night, was at the very point where the 'tacked on' piece began.
In some ways it felt separate and apart from the piece and in other ways it does make sense as the culmination of the bad thing waiting to happen, of the family turning against the youngest child because they so loved him but could not, didn't know how to , somehow somehow were unable to love who he fully was. Remember earlier on wondering about the kids being witness to their parents' sexuality; the contrast of the family recoiling from the narrator's breaks my heart.
I'm grateful for having read this and want to read it again in a while.

I really enjoyed this book. I though the writing was very poetic and strong. My emotions sommersulted through the entire narration but at the end I felt a little let down, and I am not sure why. It's not that the story needed more words. Instead, it felt to as if the wirter has decided early on that the book would be a particular length, and the discovery of his sensuality which was something so BIG, although hinted at throughout the book, needed more depth. I got it, bit it felt like his revelation to the reader came from some place abrupt and impatient.

I'll comment on a vignette in the book that I will always carry with me in terms of exquisitely drawn heartbreaking scenes. It also touches upon Mistinguettes comment about where the characters manhood development came from. The narrator says nothing was the same after Manny, instead of assaulting the hippie skateboarder, abandoned his responsibility and allowed them to join him in his basement, to see something he never imagined. The narrator looked up to Manny as his father when the three "animals" were away from home. He felt that Manny shirked his responsibility by allowing him to see the sadomasochistic film that changed his life forever. We as readers knew and the author implied that nothing would ever be the same again. The innocence of the boys so clearly projected up to this point did disappear in all the rest of the writing. And Manny in the narrators mind, was clearly to blame. I think his older brother was as much an influence on his development as was his father.

No ones sexuality is ever determined by the films they watch but the innocence of his undetermined sexuality up to this point and the way the film and the events of that night snatched them away was eviscerating to me.

I also must take umbrage at Columbus notion that most Hispanic fathers are macho and distant...My Dominican niece and her father Gustavo would surely disagree

SPOILER ALERT: I'm about to ask questions about The End of The Book in this post.

I think that Torres' ideas about masculinity are pretty nuanced, and they greatly influence what it means to him to become a man who openly loves other men. This whole set of stories are about loving the bonds of masculinity, with all its violence, terror, tenderness, rough sensuality and sense of emotional exile. I think that "We, The Animals" is not just how he thinks of he & his brothers; it is how he sees men.

I would love to hear more from the men on this list about Torres' take on how boys learn to become masculine. Do elements of this story ring true? Are the authors wounds and alienations common for men? As a woman, I mostly learned how to become a woman from female peers. Is the model of an elder, even an elder boy, essential to learning to become a man? And, given the great tenderness that exists between men, what exactly is the line that homophobia insists that men not cross? It's not about any sexual content - the author learns to watch porn with an older boy.It's clearly not about tenderness - we see Old Man and Paps as simultaneously cruel and tender as they teach the three boys how to survive in the world. What is it that men are not allowed to be to each other, without disrupting the bonds of hetero-normative masculinity?

William wrote: "I also must take umbrage at Columbus notion that most Hispanic fathers are macho and distant.."

I agree, William. It's a stereotype, and one seen through a culturally biased lens , at that. Isn't macho, in fact, the opposite of distant?

I used the phrase un muy macho earlier to describe Paps as a man embodying traditional Latino masculinity,not just "macho" in the American reductionist sense of "sexist". In what I know of Latinidad, machismo connotes being an intimate, tender protector of family; carrier of culture; model of respect and traditional roles within the family; and possessor of warrior-like physical and spiritual strength. Paps' acts of indulgence, tenderness and teaching of harsh lessons are all displays of traditional machismo - sometimes so much that they seem idealized.

Are there folks lurking on this list who could share or compare from personal experience about learning about how to be a man in the context of Latino culture? Even as a gender & cultural outsider, I can see that machismo is different from mainstream American masculinity or African-American masculinity.

William wrote: I also must take umbrage at Columbus notion that most Hispanic fathers are macho and distant
/i>.....

William, it's not my notion that "Hispanic fathers are macho and distant" - I wouldn't have any first hand knowledge of that and could not and would not speak on it.  However, these ARE some views expressed by several of my close Puerto Rican & Mexican friends and a close friend from Dominica, even.  (The actual posting states - it's what they expressed to me about the male figures in their lives....and continuing, "obviously this is not true of all"). We're certainly aware of various stereotypes perpetuated by many, some within the same clan and certainly used against those in the African American community and can extrapolate what is real and what you can take with a grain of salt. I would be remiss, however, not to mention this considering how it so affected them and how it was so therapeutic for them to share their stories.

I'm new at this club. I'll start reading as soon as I land a copy

Basmah wrote: "I'm new at this club. I'll start reading as soon as I land a copy"

Welcome, Basmah!