Well, what do you know. After a string of bedazzling reads (Crowley, Dunnett, and Murray), my disillusionment with contemporary lit continues apace.
A twelve year old genius cartographer with a quirky and symbolic name has blah blah adventures on a train en route to picking up a prize at the Smithsonian which he is too young to have honestly qualified for (meaning: misinformation was entered on the official application form. mothers were mislead. important people were lied to!) and for which he has squirreled himself away on a cross-continental choo-choo trip without telling anyone in his family. On the way to an utterly predictable ending, this adorable child ruminates about many things, including his Tragic Past, his unloving parents, his dwindling stash of carrot sticks and raisins, and the inanimate objects with which he occasionally holds conversations.
Are we getting a read on how precious this all is? Yes?
CHIEF AMONG MY COMPLAINTS:
- That age old trick of omitting mention of a Tragic Occurrence so devastating, so catastrophic, that it ejects the brokenhearted narrator from his grief-riven family and propels him two thousand miles across the country on a hobo-hopping train adventure until the very end of the story, which, incidentally, is when everything else is coming to a head, so as to maximize dramatic impact and wring a tear from my dry miser's eye. Seriously I can just feel these writers doing the literary equivalent of those algebraic equations your 9th grade pre-calculus teacher used to pile onto your desk*. Which is not bad, in and of itself, but when the import of the story is inadequately translated, the framing and the braces and the exposed rivets come into view. And when your insubstantive content fails to cover up the artificiality of your story-telling, well, then, guess what? Belief falls all to pieces.
I'm hesitant to blame this on MFA programs, but I do think the failure of certain 'literary' books is not helped by cloistered classroom settings where everyone is looking for the quick emotional fix and the quickest way to secure it is to resort to age-old techniques that have received the institutional imprimateur. You may ask: is technique the problem here? I do think so, but it is not sufficient by itself to make a mess of things. The employment of a tiringly overused narrative strategy is also compounded by how emotionally thin this story is. It does not push your boundaries. Nothing really menaces the main character. Stakes are piddling. Characters are quirky, but their quirks are poor masks for their hollowed out interiors. Larsen has one ace up his sleeve, and once that's spent, he's done. And that's when he brings in the ridiculous revelations and the deus ex machina endings.
What was it that Chabon once wrote? Stories that glitter all over with "epiphanic dew". I mean, I totally dig epiphanic dew. I down epiphanic dew by the vat, I read so much. But done badly, and/or in ways that feel like, been-there-seen-that? Just, no.
- The multiple things that are thrown in there just for funsies sake but never really explained, developed, or made to contribute anything significant to the advancement of the plot or to the growth of various characters. For example: random wormholes! Secret scientific societies! Oh so his mom knew all along??
- The themes and/or plot events that are developed are conventional, banal, easy: Washington's scientific establishment, previously enshrined in Spivet's mind as a place of monkish learning and ascetic devotion to matters of the mind, is full of money-grubbers and cynical fame whores. People, like tobocco-chewing cab drivers, are not what they seem. Family love prevails over all! Home is where the heart is. And on and on, ad nauseam.
And yes, I do think the >:(-ness of my response does have something to do with how I felt betrayed by this book's initial promise. At least its premise was interesting; at least the first 50-100 pages were really cute. Despite my complaints, Larsen does this vulnerable boy-voice very, very well. It is more than occasionally diverting. It is clever! But the story never really builds itself into something meaningful, or moving. Hence, disappointment.
Oh, god, guys. Obviously this means I have to take refuge in nonfiction (BUT THERE ARE SO MANY BOOKS, IN SO MANY CATEGORIES. I don't know where to start!), fanfiction, or classics written two hundred years ago.
*For example: John has 300 feet of lumber to frame a rectangular snake-pen, which he plans on filling with a festering nest of poisonous African bush vipers, plus an additional 200 feet of brick for his collection of feral mongoose. He wants to maximize the area of his playpen, but because of the animosity between his pets cannot afford to group them all into one enclosure. Due to the constraints imposed on his property by the city's infuriatingly byzantine zoning codes, he is also only able to construct pens which are twice as long in length as they are in width. What should the dimensions of the areas be? Show how the maximum area of the pens are calculated from a host of algebraic equations...