This is Jackie's book club pick.
This book apparently won several awards. The author was lauded in NPR interviews on Fresh Air with Maureen Corrigan and Weekend Edition with Liane Hansen. This book also got great reviews from The New Yorker, The New York Times, and the Washington Post.
I must be missing something. Except for an excerpt on p.56 which explains the love rectangle among the main characters--Charlie & Nonie, Nonie & Onslow, Onslow & Lola, Lola & Charlie--the whole first 175 pages could be deleted. The story yammers. Yammer, yammer, yammer. The action starts on p.176 with the flood, and I feel that most of the book up to that point, while poetic, is annoying. The story of the flood feels like an allegory of the flood of truth Lark finds in the birth certificates. The aftermath and resolution are unbelievable, but at least it's interesting.
I mentioned this to my son, Robert, and told him that reading this book felt like homework. He suggested I look for SparkNotes. He said that while SparkNotes might spoil the plot, at least you know what you're looking for. Interesting. It made me think that I couldn't be the only one who felt that this book was a slog.
So I went in search of a review that summed up how I felt about this book. I found it on BookBrowse.com, in an article written by Kim Kovacs, who says, "...much of Phillips' writing is simply beautiful. There are sections that are positively beautiful..." I agree. On p.42, Lark says of Stamble, "He means well...I can smell it on him like a hint." Lark describes what it's like to grow up, "All my collections are just sitting there. They're all things I used to want, and I can't tell why I did." (p.38). And later, Leavitt says, "Scared kids with weaponry do evil things..." (p.71). So true.
Kim Kovacs goes on to say, "Unfortunately, Phillips writing frequently shifts from dazzling to incomprehensible. The style becomes overly distracting, limiting the reader's ability to relax and enjoy the novel. As each character narrates his or her point of view, their perspectives shift between present and past, with few clues indicating events happened at different times. At some points the narrative is first person, at others it's third person. Sentences are inconsistently italicized, sometimes to indicate the past, sometimes emphasizing another train of thought, further confusing matters. The book's parallels and symbolism are clumsy and...contrived. Finally, some of the plot elements are overly theatrical and, in this reviewer's opinion, nonsensical." You think? Solly leaping onto a moving train on a Harley?
The Weekend Edition article says that thirty years ago, while visiting a friend in West Virginia, author Jayne Anne Phillips spotted a boy sitting in a metal chair in an alley. He stayed there for hours, holding a thin blue strip from a dry cleaning bag. That explains the inspiration for Termite. Once Phillips started writing, the 1999 AP story broke about No Gun Ri. She was inspired by that awful incident and cover-up, and decided to include it in her book. That explains the chapters narrated by Corporal Robert Leavitt. This book has gotten attention for voicing the thoughts of speech-disabled persons, as evidenced by the acknowledgements in the back of the book. It has also been compared to William Faulkner's, "The Sound and the Fury." However, I just don't see it.
Kim Kovacs finishes by saying, "Some readers may find the moments of luminescent writing enough to justify their perusal of this novel. I suspect that most, however will find the flaws overwhelming." I'm in the latter camp. There's just not enough dazzling to justify the incomprehensible.
fin.