It's almost impossible to offer a qualitative judgment of THE FINAL CASE, given its metafictional leanings, its nod toward the legal-thriller genre without ever stepping close to it, and the fact that it has less a plot than a through-line — that of the author and his family and some of the things they've seen and done, gauzy behind the thin veil of pseudonyms and reordered memories.
Is it "good"? Who's to say, really? Not me. Because "good," I suspect, is impossible to separate from one's patience for this kind of storytelling, and one's interest in its narrator's wanderings from court cases to memories of his father to rhapsodies about his wife to what amounts to a state-of-the-union unpacking about the state of white-male writers in America in 2022. It starts with something of a jerk-around, a pronouncement in metafictional mode: "If that leaves you wondering about this book—wondering if I’m kidding, or playing a game, or if I’ve wandered into the margins of metafiction or the approximate terrain of autofiction—everything here is real." It probably is, depending on one's patience for discourse about the distance between truth and fact. But, outside of conventional memoir form, which the notoriously private Guterson (a long-elusive, elliptical presence in my hometown of Bainbridge Island) shuns, is that compelling? That calls for a non-qualitative answer.
For most literary luminaries, the answer is "yes," because, I suspect, Guterson hasn't written much fiction in the last fifteen years or so, and they're just glad to have him back, this writer of graceful prose and thoughtful reflection.
For me, it's "yes, except when no."
It's well-written, mostly, but sometimes not, with the occasional clunky, overreaching line, like "Her front teeth met the way two playing cards do when stood on end and propped against each other." Figurative writing, for this student of the Raymond Carver/Richard Ford school of realism, has never been a strength of Guterson's. But his gift for human insight is intact, and, as the author stares down the barrel of his late sixties, even at new heights, particularly when sharing bits of fatherly wisdom: "When you’re young, you have a big advantage. You’re the new kid. Then, in your middle years, there’s no getting around it—people think you’re a jerk. Then you get along in years like me, and, fortunately, the picture brightens. They all think you’re out of it, which is true to some extent, so they’re nice again, like in the old days.”
Otherwise, I found that I like the legal-thriller aspects of it the most, and felt a bit adrift after Gauterson passed on to other absorptions. You probably know the story behind the story, but the trial of the Harveys, a Skagit County couple whose beyond-fundamentalist approach to Christian child-rearing led their adopted Ethiopian daughter to die of neglect, is an all-but-Hoyle recreation of a trial Guterson himself attended (he and his wife adopted an Ethiopian girl through the same paths the Harveys did, and belong to a community of like folks). The highlight of that part of the book is not so much any Grisham-esque or Turow-like legal machinations, but a long, sustained, hateful rant by the family matriarch that manages to bundle every ethnic and political group into a kit bag of concentrated dismissive disdain. It's really a jaw-dropping horror to behold, and it opens with "“You know what? You’re from Seattle. In Seattle, they elect communists to sit on their city council. They call it socialist, but it’s the same—communist. Seattle got the wool pulled over their eyes. By the people make the commercials on television. You realize that?" and goes on for several pages. You don't need me to point out that the woman's views, serenely untroubled by nuance or fact, are those of upwards of 40 percent of Americans in 2022.
Equally discomforting, in a different way, is the book's other sustained rant, a self-pitying splatter by a young white writer who feels he's missed his time and place, and resents himself and the world for it, and lets loose in an orgasm of corrosive privilege. As he tells our narrator: "Upper-class white guy—the villain in movies. I’m despicable doing nothing, just sitting on my ass. I take classes where I’m told, by everyone in the room, that I’m racist by definition, doesn’t matter what I think—all I have to do is sit there inside my white skin to be racist, that’s it—and if I don’t respond to that, just sit there silently, that’s racist, too, and at the same time, if I speak, doesn’t matter what I say, it’s racist, and it’s about time I recognized it, because recognition is the first step, and after that, if I don’t wear a sign around my neck saying I’m a racist, and if I don’t become an activist working against racism, doing things that will lead to a day when white guys like me aren’t in charge anymore, then that’s racist, too." It goes on from there in a similarly loathsomely self-loathing vein.
So, I dunno. In the end, all I have is my experience with THE FINAL CASE. I liked it except when I was impatient with it. I understood it except when I didn't. I'm glad I read it, I guess, though I can't imagine reading it again. I'm glad David Guterson's still at it, I suppose, and hasn't completely given up prose for poetry, as was believed to be the case some time ago. He's got things to say, and those things are worth listening to, and THE FINAL CASE is full of Things to Say, some of which hit the mark for me, and some of which didn't. Which is fine. If I wrote a similar novel about myself, I expect its readers would have the same kind of ambivalence.