It seems to me that the readers who have left less than favourable reviews are approaching this book (and many others by Gaarder) from the wrong context.
He doesn’t write for the same reasons as the majority of ‘novelists’; and, though his books don’t form a ‘series’ as such, they are, nonetheless, deeply connected to one another. As Jostein himself makes explicit by reusing certain significant phrases throughout his canon of writing. For instance the variants on ‘a lottery where only the winning numbers are visible’; his many and various allusions to an ‘outsider’ or ‘joker (in the pack)’; as well as his themes and the way he picks apart very ordinary phrases, words, or concepts, thus allowing us to ‘see’ them as if for the first time.
I am no exceptional genius, and I can’t think of a Gaarder that I’ve finished with the satisfaction of having understood every subtle nuance or significance that Gaarder has coded in, like a kind of meta-physical (or should that be -fictional) puzzle. I make many connections, especially when I refer back to the other books I have read by him, but Gaarder is a Joker of the highest order (I consider him one of the most intelligent human beings living today - and I do not say that lightly), and through my own intellectual studied and sphere’s of interest, I am only slowly catching up to anything like the plane of consciousness that Jostein Gaarder inhabits. But I’m learning, slowly and surely, I hope.
Gaarder doesn’t just reveal ‘his’ truths; he writes about universal human truths - things like: we have a responsibility not to destroy our planet; how much wonder and magic there is in the world are ultimately our own responsibility too - only we can choose what we see of what is; fiction (and thus meta-fiction in particular) are absolutely intrinsic to the human condition; the world as we know it; they are the birthplace of ideas - but who are we to say what is truth or fiction - and is there really any real divide?
I am being brief here, as there is simply too much to say. I have heard it said of Kurt Vonnegut, and a few others, that their books should be read as a cannon, rather than purely individual pieces - and the same is true of Gaarder. I think the key to all Gaarder’s work is Maya; though Sophie’s World is essential as a general understanding of what Gaarder is about.
I think An Unreliable Man is a message of hope - Gaarder has spelt it out (in Maya and later in Anna) that we have a cosmic responsibility to the life and health of our planet; but he also speaks to us on a very human and intimate level. Jakop is a very lonely man, as many of us have been at various points in our own lives, he is (perhaps deeply) flawed, he is confused and doesn’t seem to be aware of his part in the drama of the world. But what he does still has meaning, has significance. And he has that rare, brief and beautiful glimpse of eternity on the ferry boat. If the human race lives long enough, we may one day begin to fully understand the wisdom of this author. But even if we can’t right now - we can but try.
Don’t read this book as a ‘novel’ by a great author. It is so much more than that. Please don’t rate and judge it on that. Read it as the latest instalment, the next chapter in the revelations of this great man. This thinker and this writer. I’m sure Gaarder would be the first to deny these accolades, but this isn’t the place for such modesty. His message is important and we need it, don’t ever stop saying what you need to, Gaarder, because we too need to hear it.
On the other hand, I did struggle with this book. And that had nothing to do with the writing style or talent - it is as candid and up front as ever, but I suppose I wasn’t sure that I was in the mood to read something that would force me from being an ‘armchair’ reader, into something that forced me off of the sofa, back to my desk and to try to delve deeper into the meaning of this writer’s philosophy on life, the universe, and everything. It leaves one satisfied on one level, somehow soothed by whatever redemption we can find for Jakop/Jakop as Pelle; but also frustrated with my own brain for only half-seeing what I feel is a knowledge (or wisdom) that to my sub-conscious brain is overwhelmingly obvious, and life-affirming, but that so far I only vaguely grasp with my conscious brain. Gaarder is offering salvation of an ancient but very relevant kind. Just bear this in mind when you read him. I’m not looking to patronise anyone, only to try to help in some way those who may be willing to look with fresh eyes on a book that is not a novel, but something more akin to the vast book that is both simultaneously being written and has been written, of life, the universe, and everything. But us in particular.