I'll Let You Go

by Bruce Wagner

Twelve-year-old Toulouse “Tull” Trotter lives on his grandfather’s vast Bel-Air parkland estate with his mother, the beautiful, drug-addicted Katrina—a landscape artist who specializes in topiary labyrinths. He spends most of his time with young cousins Lucy, “the girl detective,” and Edward, a prodigy undaunted by the disfiguring effects of Apert Syndrome. One day, an impulsive revelation by Lucy sets in motion a chain of events that changes Tull—and the Trotter family—forever.

In this latter-day Thousand and One Nights, a boy seeks his lost father and a woman finds her long-lost love . . . while a family of unimaginable wealth learns that its fate is bound up with two Amaryllis, a street orphan who aspires to be a saint, and her protector, a homeless schizophrenic, clad in Victorian rags, who is accused of a horrifying crime.

Genres: Fiction, Novels, Literature, Literary Fiction

544 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2001

About the author

Bruce Wagner is the author of The Chrysanthemum Palace (a PEN Faulkner fiction award finalist); Still Holding; I'll Let You Go (a PEN USA fiction award finalist); I'm Losing You; and Force Majeure. He lives in Los Angeles.

Reviews

[Jim Leckband · Rating 4 out of 5]

During the 17th and 18th centuries, Holland was one of the richest countries on Earth - and when there are rich people, there are artists and artisans who craft and sell to them. A new painting style emerged, the still life (or nature morte in French), that was all the rage. Sumptuous displays of flowers (Amaryllis, Rose e.g.) and displays of household items or food were common subjects.

But wait a minute. There was something else in these still lifes that the Dutch made a peculiar obsession about. There were decayed blossoms, or rotted food, or predatory insects, or skulls (!) mixed in with the ravishing luxurious flowers, velvets, and silver. These were memento moris - or symbols of death amongst life and luxury.

And this is what is happening in "I'll Let You Go", a tale to remind you that even in the pleasantest of places (Beverly Hills) there is always one visitor that never leaves (Et in Arcadia Ego). Wagner pulls off a tough feat - how to make you care about the one-percentest of the one-percent while telling a great tale.

Dickens (a very huge influence in this book), comparatively, had it easy. Usually the poor were good and the rich were bad (always with exceptions!). But that isn't Wagner's game in this one. There are no obvious satirical points being scored on the cluelessness of the uber-rich (though there is rich satire underneath - like a grubworm in the loam of a Dutch floral still life). Instead, his focus on Death and Transfiguration. There are scads of memento moris spread throughout the book: Cemeteries, Monuments, Decayed Columns and Great Danes (both the short-lived dog and Hamlet).

The characters also have obsessions with death. Louis Trotter commissions and collects funeral monuments from hotshot artists and architects to find the right one for after his death. Joyce Trotter is rabid about burying and naming cast away newborns. Genetically-diseased Edward knows his death is coming soon and is preparing for it.

All this attention to death gives some gravitas to the wild plots and peregrinations of the characters. Combining elements of Les Misérables, Oliver Twist, Vanity Fair and One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest with Wagner's knowing but never cynical (for once!) prose gives the reader a lot to nestle in and savor. The only caveat is that the book goes slow near the end as the narrative drive slackens. A little like life (or death), that.

[Sophia · Rating 5 out of 5]

I read this in college and happily it is just as fantastic as I remembered. The ultra-rich and the starving poor in modern-day Beverly Hills, bitter screenwriters, children who charter their own round-the-world private jet trip and stop off at Easter Island, a brilliant, snarky, deformed ten year old boy who sews his own hoods, cousin-on-cousin incest, a crackhead's daughter who's obsessed with becoming a Jewish saint just like her hero Edith Stein and who cycles through a series of horrible foster homes, a man who's been living under the delusion that he is William Morris the Enlightenment-era textile designer and writer, and all the descriptions of designer clothing and life on the streets of LA you could ask for, plus a great dane named Pullman.

And it has an ENDING. Not the most perfect one, but unlike almost all the mainstream fiction I've read recently, it doesn't either cut out abruptly or add in a new storyline only to finish it off in fifteen pages instead of the hundred it needs. The storylines wind to gentle conclusions with a brief coda that works, and I came away feeling both a little happier and a little sadder.

[Liss · Rating 1 out of 5]

Terrible, takes a lot to say very little. Characters were never really well developed, the writing is too flowery, it takes away from the story.

[CRO · Rating 3 out of 5]

3 1/4 Stars

I've gotten behind on my reviewing here, so this book has already been returned to the library, so please forgive if I've lost some of the names of the characters.

This was a book that popped up on my goodreads recommends list and it sounded sort of like a novel version of The Royal Tannenbaums - a film fave of mine - so I took the bait and arranged to get it through my inter-library loan system.

It's kind of a Dickensian, sprawling family drama, bisected by seething satire of LA and Hollywood. But from what I understand of Wagner, he is someone firmly entrenched in the Hollywood scene, being also a screenwriter and director himself - so he kind of has a front row seat to all of those Hollywood shennanigans that he likes to write about. My other experience with Wagner is the film version of his other novel in this cell phone series I'm Losing You. I haven't read that book, but Wagner wrote the screenplay himself and directed - so I think the film gave me a pretty good idea of the book. I'm Losing You, if not warm and fuzzy exactly, was haunting - I thought about the movie for days - and I don't think that I could say that I actually enjoyed the movie, but it did really get to me. When I found out the connection between I'll Let You Go and I'm Losing You, I was kind of disappointed that the former didn't take more of hold on me - really saturate my skin so to speak.

Let me start with what I didn't like: The seething satire became a little soul sucking and got on my nerves - it read like a Hollywood insiders inside joke written for his other Hollywood insider friends - ugh.
The "Dear Reader" narrator and footnotes felt completely out of place with his withering satire and the narration was kind of clunky in its execution.
Over use of creepily precocious and adult sounding children as mouth pieces for the writers philosophical, social, and political ideas. I really don't think that even a genius child and one who grew up in the upper class of the Hollywood elite, upon hearing the name of William Morris, would make an automatic jump to the Victorian designer and not the Hollywood talent agency.
All of the characters were unlikeable except poor, orphan Amaryllis (who is like the Job of this story). I don't think we were meant to like them - but I have to say that the problems of the uber rich - if they are not presented in the right way -draw no sympathy from me. And I wanted to like them, wanted to root for them - and it is the job of the author to help me understand the unlikeable characters so that I'm drawn in - and I wasn't. I really didn't care. And the the good characters were so wimpy. Like the baker's wife,she hemmed and hawed about what the right move to make was – hiding her selfishness behind indecision. And then when acts of kindness were performed, they usually, more often than not, made the situation – especially in the case of Amaryllis – much worse. I don't think that Wagner could disengage himself enough from being a snarky, commentator, when the time came, to be able to give the reader an objective and yet not emotionally dislocated portrait of his characters.
And then there was Topsy - the only real innocent and truly noble character in the novel - the hub of the wheel for all of the other characters to spoke out from. I got the sense that Wagner really wanted us to like this guy - but I just couldn't - as a character he made my skin crawl with his asexual, "King of Hearts isn't mental illness fun and freeing" kind of characterization --- ick.

So why is this a worthwhile book and author?" So despite the push pull of the writing style (I want to try and pull you in with characterization and then push you away with biting satire) I feel like I need to champion this dude. On Goodreads, this writer is totally under-read and totally under-reviewed. He comes from the era of late 90's early 2000 writers/ artists/ commentators etc. who don't seem to have been able to make the jump over the fiery chasm of 9/11 to find any social or artistic recognition here on the other side. Which is kind of a shame, because despite my beefs,the man can really write and create characters and an engaging and twisted story that really does draw you in.

And he has this really weird and whimsical and raw - part sentimental-pollyanna/ part cynical satirist style. It's like Wagner can't decide which side he wants to come down on so he smushes the sentimental and the satirical together into one novel. And I know, just a paragraph ago I was complaining about this because the transitions between the 2 poles of the writing style were giving me whiplash. Even still, despite the shuddering, clunkiness, I was moved - the novel broke my heart. Because it's like we're watching Wagner's personal struggle to reconcile the absurd selfishness of modern society (read Hollywood) with the equally absurd yet hopeful Hollywood movie formula. And this struggle between realism/ satire/ and starry-eyed hopefulness gets all wrapped and twisted around the main love interests of the novel – Amaryllis and Tull. And their relationship broke my heart and saved this novel for me. It sounds corny, but I liked the hopefulness of their love for one another and I liked the slightly chagrined and tremblingly honest and unapologetic way in which Wagner presented them to the reader. Like Wagner was telling us "I know I've dragged you through the shittiest, most vain, and most shallow aspects of the human condition - but here are Amaryllis and Tull and their star crossed love - have some hope." I think Wagner brought them together in a really sweet way too. Because in the timeline of the novel, despite following the child characters into adulthood, we don't see the fireworks like explosion of the consummation of their true love. It's a slow and gradual and tentatively searching union that Wagner only hints at - giving the reader the image of doors that the lovers still have to pass through before they find each other. So we don't get to see them come together, but Wagner gives us hope that it will happen and that it will be as happy and unexpected and inevitable as one day opening a door and finding the love of your life standing there.

Ok, I'm making it sound much cornier than he did. Trust me, Wagner presents their relationship shatteringly well.

So despite my gripes – more people need to read this author and this novel. Hence my extra ¼ of a star.

[Jamie Rose · Rating 5 out of 5]

I'm giving this five stars because Wagner is clearly a genius with words. Having said that, much of the time, I felt his words put a barrier between me and this densely fascinating story. Still, while reading, I knew I was in the hands of a master, the characters are fresh, surprising, inventive, the story moving. I recommend.

[Jon · Rating 5 out of 5]

I thought it was a fantastic book. It's relationship to Dickens was explicit, but in a way that was charming and enlivening, rather than trite. Especially since Wagner's prose is so elegant and original and unique. There are some rough bits, so to speak, particularly concerning the orphan character, and I did wonder if that had to be so nightmarish, but it was far from a parade of horrors and she is much more than a victim. The way that the characters come to life in this book meant that even though I read the book in fits and starts, when I resumed I needed no re-introduction, they already felt like relatives or friends. I appreciated, too, that although this is a very hopeful book, it isn't hopeful to a fault, no Pollyanna delusional happy endings for characters that are quite complicated. I would highly recommend this book to anyone who likes picaresque novels, despite the tremendous differences in writing styles, among other things, and the fact that it follows multiple characters-rather than just Toulouse, at its center-I'll Let You Go still somehow reminded me of The Adventures of Augie March, another novel I loved reading.

[Neil Aring · Rating 4 out of 5]

I really liked this and it really engaged me although it was not an easy read. I was glad I was on my tablet so I could look up words quickly. I have a pretty good vocabulary but had to look up words a lot. At first I thought it was a little annoying but then I got the impression that the author just really loves words and was sharing them like little jewels.
What's it about ? Read the other reviews. I'm just stuck trying to figure out how to describe it.

[Elena Galluzzo · Rating 4 out of 5]

I highly recommend this book. It took me a while to read it because I did have to look up a lot of big words, I’m not gonna lie. I had to reread pages because I knew I was missing the meaning. I had to get used to his style of writing in the narrative, but I fell in love with all of the characters. I love the way the characters all intertwined with each other at the end and each character was so interesting and really took the stage when it was their turn up. Highly recommend.

[Scott Avery · Rating 5 out of 5]

one of the many marvelous novels I've read thanks to the Marvelous Michiko..

Virtuosic . . . [attests] not only to Mr. Wagner’s range as a writer—his ability to write with affecting sincerity as well as satiric glee—but also to his power as a storyteller to beguile.” —Michiko Kakutani, The New York Times

#michikokakutani

[Julie · Rating 3 out of 5]

the first 2/3 of this book were fair at best. The last third of the book made up for it. The beginning was just too pretentious. The lives of the Trotter family ended up be an interesting read. I almost gave up on it which I never do and I'm glad I didn't but can't give it a great recommendation.

[Tammy · Rating 2 out of 5]

I'm ditching. Loved the writing but the story itself was too grim.

[Josephine · Rating 4 out of 5]

bruce wagner is so incredibly underrated. i did not want this book to end.

[Carly · Rating 4 out of 5]

I am at a loss on this one. It's much better than many reviewers here have expressed; very Dickensian and I am a fan. I think it was maybe a little corny that the author inserted comments about Dickens and Victorian times in a not at all subtle way. Maybe not the literary work of a lifetime, but what a fabulous story and interesting characters. For that it is worth it. I thoroughly enjoyed it and found the pages flying by. If you like the screwed up coincidences that usually befall families whose lives revolve around a secret, then you'll enjoy this.

[Dotty · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is not my review - but it says it all. I loved this book!

In her New York Times review of Bruce Wagner's brilliant new novel, Michiko Kakutani calls it a virtuoso piece and then goes on to say,"His tale and the myriad other plot lines it generates attest not only to Mr. Wagner's range as a writer - his ability to write with affecting sincerity as well as satiric glee - but also to his power as a storyteller to beguile."
I couldn't agree more. It is LA seen through the eyes of Dickens, by way of Tom Wolfe.

[Lisa · Rating 5 out of 5]

this is the best novel i've read in a decade or more! it's a charming story about an eccentric group of kids and their families living (and dying) in los angeles. it wavers between gritty and heartbreaking, and magical with a touch of the sort of fantasy that great films are made of. it reads like a film (and was penned by a screenwriter). i savored every page and was sorry to see it come to an end. it's a gem!

[Charles · Rating 5 out of 5]

My favorite novel of one of my favorite novelists. An ingenious and moving Victorian pastiche about surprising relationships between the super-rich and the very poor in contemporary Los Angeles. Wagner's most fully realized and humane novel.

[Jenn · Rating 5 out of 5]

I thought I had a good vocabulary, but I did have to read this book with Webster's by my side. It was worth it though. It's a crazy baroque Dickensian Los Angeles novel. It's just really hard to describe.

[Alyssa · Rating 4 out of 5]

The book started off slowly but built up to a solid conclusion. For the most part, the Trotters and those around them were lovable, even when it didn't make sense for them to be. Definitely a pleasant surprise.

[Elly · Rating 3 out of 5]

More like 3.5, a great story, however too detailed and fragmented, it felt like an eternity reading over 550 pages. None of the characters are very likable. So I kept reading out of not wanting to give up. This is definitely not a favorite regardless all the critics reviews.

[Lily · Rating 1 out of 5]

There were three Bruce Wagner books on my list. The first one I read was ok. I hated the second one, and this was just too much. I got to chapter six and I’m just done. I just am really not into the writing, it doesn’t do it for me :(

[Kayla · Rating 4 out of 5]

I loved this book when I read it a few years ago. Upon reread I found it a little pretentious, but still good.

[Judy · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is a great read. Really interesting writing style.

[Heidi · Rating 5 out of 5]

LOVED this book...majikal Los Angeles in the style of Francesca Lia Block. Fascinating history of an eccentric rich family.

[Clare218 · Rating 4 out of 5]

Hard to get through at times, but worth the effort

[Cindy Speer · Rating 1 out of 5]

Actually never finished. After 100 pages I found myself not wanting to continue, which is very rare for me. Very wordy and took too long to get to know the characters.

[Cindy Beavers · Rating 1 out of 5]

Only read a few pages - didn't hold my interest