Considering Suicide

by Andy Nowicki

This book will trouble many readers, but so did Emerson s essays and Thoreau s Walden. Like those writings, Considering Suicide is non-conformist. It will even irritate those who proudly consider themselves non-conformists. Its essence, however, is not teeth-bearing cynicism or brutal bitterness but manifested hurt, the hurt that comes to a caring and sensitive soul who sees before him the slow but inevitable suicide of the culture in which he has been raised. Throughout the book, from the early diary of a man contemplating the taking of his own life on through the commentary that follows, one question reverberates: Is life worth living? It is, finally, up to the reader to answer the question after being confronted with an uncompromising, totally honest, cuttingly perceptive, and highly intelligent appraisal of the state of the union.

Though anger, even outrage, may appear to dominate the tone of Considering Suicide, notes of pity and love make their way through the loud music of discord to mark the author not as a nihilist but as a deeply spiritual seeker who desires the best for humankind but who is, Jeremiah-like, witnessing their sins of self-destruction.

212 pages, Paperback

First published August 1, 2009

Reviews

[MRDA · Rating 4 out of 5]

I got quite a bit out of this little literary gem. More than I initially thought when I read the synopsis. A powerfully partisan, yet probing piece that strikes the reader in the face with sincerity, Considering Suicide may or may not win one over to the author’s outlook: what it will do is make you re-examine your own. Is life worth living—for you?

A more in-depth evaluation: https://www.mrdas-inferno.com/2010/04...

Merged review:

https://www.mrdas-inferno.com/2010/04...

[Anita Dalton · Rating 3 out of 5]

... too often those who write polemics present them as proven theses rather than admitting that they are, in fact, just presenting their very personal beliefs as an attack against a rival ideology. Diana West’s ridiculous The Death of the Grown-Up comes to mind. A polemic against what West believes to be cultural childishness caused by us evil liberals, West’s book savagely attacked modern customs. However, instead of lashing out against a culture West found deficient, she attempted to provide proof that bolstered her intense opinions and completely destroyed her premise because each piece of “evidence” she used to show the degeneracy of modern America was open to lots of interpretation. That which West felt genuinely showed American culture to be childish proved nothing more than her own entrenched opinions. What could have been a coherent savaging of modernity became an “old man yells at cloud” moment wherein West felt that by using sources that showed that Cary Grant wore camel hair coats and tourists wear fanny packs and some guy felt Look Who’s Talking Now proved John Travolta is immature and Bill Gates wears ball caps and Jack Nicholson was edgy around 40 years ago and similarly irrelevant and strange citations that she had made a prima facie case that America lacks the gravitas of black and white films from the 1950s. Her attack was lost in an ocean of trivial “facts,” her momentum destroyed as the reader was forced to decide if ball caps are really a sign of the fall of Western Civilization, and she came across less as a seasoned polemicist than a cranky racist who holds a grudge against anyone who was not raised in the Diana West household.

A polemic is not a proven thesis – it’s just one side of a very passionate argument. Those who believe as the polemicist does will find truth in the attack, and those on the other side will not, but the polemicist’s case is seldom helped by source citations because an honest polemicist knows that his or her attack exists in the realm of opinion, not fact. Just as there was no way to prove that liking Maya Angelou meant one was childish (and trying to do so made it clear that West really resents anyone but white folk like her having any cultural influence), there was no way for Nowicki to prove that a return to Judeo-Christian (mostly Catholic) mores and 1950s standards of behavior will prevent cultural suicide. I appreciate that he didn’t try, that he kept this book in the realm of the polemic. While I really disagree with the premise, I still can appreciate this book for what it is – Nowicki’s intense reaction to a society in which he finds little merit.

Nowicki also has an advantage over failed polemicists like West in that he manages to create a personal experience for the reader and is quite accomplished at wielding a mild sort of black humor. The first half of the book, entitled “Diary of a Suicide,” was quite engaging and I rather wish this book had not included the second part because the second half abandons humor and the personalized experience fades as Nowicki merges into the strident opinions that make a good polemic. In a sense, this book really wouldn’t be a polemic if Nowicki had not included the second half, and my liberal leanings definitely influence my dislike of the second half, but even so I think most people will find the first part of the book a very good read. So I think I will concentrate on the first half of the book.

You can read my entire discussion here.