Just like the name of Jonathan Fenton’s novel, “Scissors, Paper, Rock”, time is anything but the order you expect it to be in in his 1993 exploration of the lives of the Kentucky-based Hardin family.
While several perspectives center tightly around one specific time and place: that of Raphael’s visiting of his father in 1990 as Raphael is dying of AIDS, others, while still important, are less directly relevant, such as the story of Joe Ray, one of Tom’s other sons, who gets in a car accident in which his son is heavily injured and becomes friends with the other woman in the accident.
Of course, after that chapter comes to a close so is Joe Ray relegated for the entirety of the rest of the novel to a background character with no more than a few lines. His wife comes into play for a bit later on as well, but not long before she too bows out forever.
In this, the work calls to mind, to this reader, to “A Visit From the Goon Squad” by Jennifer Egan, in which stories also span decades between various characters, some of great importance to the story, others less so.
Raphael’s journey to California alongside a hitchhiking foreigner intent on seeing cowboys called Willy, in which Raphael for the first time finds himself directly struggling with his homosexual feelings, could effectively serve as its own short story. It’s also, while not directly relevant to the meeting between father and son, arguably the most valuable of the times and places explored in this novel in that it gives a much needed depth of character to Raphael that others occasionally seem to lack.
Some of the people in Paper, Scissors Rock occasionally don’t feel fully like people so much as old, wise men,: thinking, and often saying aloud, profound or sometimes not so profound but profound-sounding things that very few people would ever actually say in any context.
As an example, Tom Hardin’s friend Miss Camilla tells Raphael near the end of the novel: “Out of their love came you and all your brothers and sisters. This is the chain of being, that breaks and reforms and continues itself in ways of its own devising. I am a dead end. I have no issue. I have nothing to pass on.” (pg.255) Beautiful writing, but it’s difficult for this reader to imagine any situation in which a human being would ever say something like that. Or when Miss Camilla says: “One way to know evil is that those who do it hide from what they have done. You are hiding, here, from what you have done.” (pg.8) This works better, for this reader, as introspection rather than spoken aloud. Said aloud, it sounds artificial, or at best like a line from a fantasy novel rather than a fictional one.
The last chapter, in which Miss Camilla speaks with the dying Raphael, feels like a barrage of ‘profound’ moments and sentences like these. Many of the things said and thought genuinely are profound and interesting, but it feels like they come so rapidly and consistently that their meanings, for this reader, anyway, feel diluted.
The irony is that the same beauty with which the characters constantly seem to think, but far more importantly speak serves to suck the humanity out of the characters. Elegant, beautiful thinking is one thing that can be (mostly) forgiven in prose, but speaking is a whole different thing. The endless proselytizing makes the characters often feel less like their own people and more like mouthpieces for Johnson to philosophize and project his viewpoints onto them. While this is not all bad, it’s the method of inhuman elegance and the frequency with which Fenton delivers these thoughts that rubs this reader the wrong way.
If Fenton had focused more intently, in this case, on AIDS and Raphael’s struggles, rather than numerous characters and timeframes and themes of death and family and grief and memory and so on, it would have probably felt like a far more cohesive work than it is.
Compare this work to a book like “Blood Meridian, or the Evening Redness in the West” by Cormac McCarthy, which, over some 350 pages interrogates almost obsessively the nature of violence—or, as Harold Bloom writes, is violence in and of itself. While you could potentially argue Mccarthy explores violence to the point that it gets boring and exhausting, you can at least also argue that that is the entire point.
The amount of themes and profound Fenton tries to pack into this work’s slim 240-something pages, in comparison, simply do not feel quite earned for them to hit in a meaningful way most of the time.
I also felt like the novel was building to some final confrontation, some catharsis, between Raphael and his father. They both die in the same town, in the same hospital, but still, it seems, deeply separate from one another by the novel’s end. A subversion of the reader’s expectations is not necessarily bad, especially in a case like this, given the fact that probably a lot of families never really reconcile around these issues, but I felt like, by the end of this novel, something was missing that might not be so absent if there had been some sort of final encounter, good or bad. This might just be my opinion, but I was confused and unsatisfied at Fenton’s decision to put Raphael with Miss Camilla at the end of the book when all of the emotion and the conflict was not in their relationship, but in Raphael’s relationship with his father, Tom.
Johnson writes in the afterword that Miss Camilla is in many ways an autobiography of himself, the observer and outsider who watches but is never noticed. Given how Camilla is the source of the majority of the out-of-place-sounding aphorisms in this novel and is thus arguably the most inorganic-feeling, this reader wonders at the intelligence of this decision.
Fenton also, in the afterword, notes that “my characters, and at times my narrative voice, made observations that had never occurred to me before their writing.” He treats this idea as if it is some revelatory discovery, but one could potentially argue that most great authors go into writing a work learning many things about their characters or about the story or even about life that they didn’t already have before they began writing.
All in all, this is a novel that is trying too hard to serve as a mouthpiece for the author to deliver numerous unearned profundities, rather than actually giving a real portrait of real, living people.
2/5