21st Century Literature discussion

This thread is for discussion of the Prologue and Part One.

You may notice that the prologue and some other parts of the book are in italics. Those parts take place much earlier than the main action of the book. The prologue provides a very condensed history of the Whitings, the family that built its mill and factory at Empire Falls, and thus gave life to the town. The prologue tells of three generations of Whitings, starting with old Elijah Whiting, who is in his late 80's at the time of the prologue, and lives in the carriage house out back. Elijah's son Honus is turning 60. Honus's son, C.B. (Charles Beaumont) Whiting, is in his late 20's when he returns to Empire Falls after years of traveling. C.B. builds a hacienda across the river, and then is discouraged to find that every piece of trash thrown in the water up-river comes to rest on his land.

Several points to consider here. We are told that Whiting men "invariably married women who made their lives a misery," (p.4) and that "it was the particular curse of the Whiting men that their wives remained loyal to them out of spite" (p.5). Does this long-term fidelity (and misery) affect how the town develops?

C.B. interprets the trash coming to his shore as a sign that God is against him. C.B. decides to change the course of the river. What effects is this likely to have?

re: the trash from the river - well, as we later find out, it's not so easy to change "the will of God".

James, you have obviously read the whole book already. It's good to have you in the discussion, but please be careful about spoilers.

ok. actually, I'm only about 40% finished. I was trying to be discreet in my comments!

Howdy people. I'll be joining in with you this time. This is an excellent choice and one I've been meaning to read for some time.

Best get at it :-)

Cyd, I'm glad you're joining us. James, so that was a lucky guess about the trash?

I really enjoyed the writing with the prologue. It felt like it urged me on with strong narrative.

However, I am not liking the dozen or so pages of Part I that I've read. I find it boring structurally and find the narrative has become childish. Does it get better? The characterization is engaging, but it's hard to read just for likable characters...

I usually don't mind giving up on books like this because there are so many good ones out there.

Carl, this one is well worth your time. Yes, it gets better. Also, in some ways it's a "mosaic" book. Lots of little pieces all through the book that do not appear to mean much on their own add up to a rich and detailed picture if you stay with it.
If you are only a dozen or so pages in, don't be so impatient. You've scarcely begun to meet the many engaging characters. Tick, in particular, gets much more interesting when you see her point of view.

Ok, I'll hang with it. Sometimes this kind of structure: light dialogue, background, light dialogue, background, etc., etc., is annoying, but I do like the characters and hope I don't sick of the town...

Carl wrote: "...hope I don't sick of the town...
..."

Well....sometimes books do tell us what the author wants to tell us. It will be interesting to see what this group considers that to be. Somewhere I read recently someone who viewed Russo as one of those authors who will continue to read 100 years from now. As a perspective from which to read Empire Falls, one can certainly ask how true the story is as a record of late 20th century New England Americana in a town that has seen its early sources of wealth and industry migrate and mutate.

We've met a lot of characters in Part One. For some, we have seen what's happening from their point of view: Miles, Janine, Tick, and Max. Others we see from the outside, including Mrs. Whiting, Walt, Jimmy Minsky, Father Mark, Father Tom, and others. Miles and Tick I found very sympathetic, but Janine and Max are harder calls. Do you think seeing their point of view makes them more sympathetic?

Miles and Tick definitely have sympathetic elements, but I find myself appreciating how Miles in particular serves as a foil for the other characters. Just as they can read his thoughts before he even knows what he's thinking himself, so we can see their character reflected in his...can I call it innocence? Using Miles as an anchor for character development is one of the reasons why I'm appreciating the book so much. Yes, it's small town myopic and simplistic, but there's something almost ineffably human about his characters that would likely be drowned out in a story less simple.

You put it very well, Daniel. Miles is almost a sort of everyman. And the town is so small that it reminds me of a song, "High school never ends." Miles can go to renew his car license and find the clerk is someone he knew in high school. Miles and James Minsky still have a relationship somewhat like the tension between them growing up, and their children, Tick and Zack, also have a problematic, tense sort of relationship.

I'm not sure, but I think the writing is getting worse!

Take this passage - it's awful! It's hard to believe any kind of editor saw this book:

Summer was one thing, but it was much harder to be friendless during the school year when as a friendless person you were constantly on display. Losing Zack wasn’t so bad in itself. At least she didn’t have to wonder every day what kind of mood he was in, whether he’d be nice or mean, his behavior about as predictable as the wind. So being without a boyfriend was okay, even though she doubted she’d find another anytime soon. What worried her more than losing Zack was losing his friends, the whole Zack network. While they were together, his friends had been her friends, but as soon as they broke up, she discovered the truth: that they were his friends, every one of them. Not that they disliked her. She suspected that a couple of them actually liked her better than they liked Zack, or would’ve been happy to remain neutral, had the rules permitted any such thing. But they didn’t, and Zack wasn’t someone you wanted for an enemy. Right away she’d started getting calls from his friends urging her to get back together with him, hinting that she wouldn’t be welcome in their group otherwise. A couple of the boys sounded almost afraid, like they couldn’t imagine the kind of recklessness she was contemplating. One of the girls even volunteered that Zack might be willing to break up with this new girlfriend if Tick came back, maybe, though it wasn’t for...

Carl, these are thoughts inside a teenager's head. Looked at in that light, they seem pretty natural to me.

I understand. I'm not criticizing the content. It's the writing that's awful. It actually reads like it's for a pre-teen audience, which is fine for them, but it certainly isn't literary quality in my opinion.

To add to that, I think that in a literary piece, the thoughts expressed could have been done in one or two sentences.

Carl: There's a folksy feel to the writing that's a far cry from the crisp prose of, say, DeLillo, but I don't know that I'd call it awful. It reminds me more of Austen or Dickens.

I also wonder whether the setting of a small New England town demands this sort of writing. Yes, it's rambling, but it also sounds exactly like the conversation you would hear at a local diner.

I think the author wanted it to sound like Tick's point of view, to give us a sense of what went on in Tick's mind. The thoughts could have been expressed in fewer sentences, but then it wouldn't have been Tick's point of view any more; it would be an omniscient narrator telling us what Tick thought.

I know it's a matter of tastes, but I think that is my objection: his weak handling of limited omniscient. This book is a great example of what they teach when they say show don't tell. I loved the prologue but the rest has been tell, tell, tell with flimsy dialogue. The characters are cool. I'm going to finish, but this is definitely the worst Pulitzer winner I've ever read. I have a feeling the prize was a political gesture.

Daniel, also, I don't mind folksy. Denis Johnson writes in the same vein, but in my opinion, he is a far better writer, and I love his folksy stuff. It's artistic. And I don't think we can put Russo in the same ballpark as Dickens.

Interesting comments. Has anyone read a book called "American Rust "? The theme of a devolution of the American dream is given a darker treatment in it. What I like about Empire is it's light tone with dark undercurrents. it brings a sense of foreboding to the plot elements...i mean, can we envision a bright future for the people in this town? Miles? Jimmy Minty? Miles' soon to be ex?, David?... Thats what I meant about reversing the will of God ...

Carl wrote: "Daniel, also, I don't mind folksy. Denis Johnson writes in the same vein, but in my opinion, he is a far better writer, and I love his folksy stuff. It's artistic. And I don't think we can put Russ..."

I think that comment gets more to the heart of the matter, and I agree: Russo's prose style is not artistic.

James wrote: "What I like about Empire is it's light tone with dark undercurrents. it brings a sense of foreboding to the plot elements..."

I love that concept. Well put!

James, you're right about the underlying darkness, and I think that's what I like about the characterization. In a sense, he paints the end of the industrial revolution, the decline of religion, and the decline of culture. That is why in the prologue, I had sympathy for the escape to Mexico, the escape to art, the escape across the river but in the end, they're all tied to this sickened society of consumerism and unholy focus on economic boom, which did turn out to be an unrealistic dream.

Casceil: I'm listening to the audiobook version, so I wasn't sure whether I had already crossed into Part II yet. Ends up I was far from it. I just wanted to point out that while Janine and Max are "harder calls" (as you put it), by God does he nail their characters. I've seen the Janine/Walt Comeau story play out in real life. I'm finding Russo's version to be utterly believable.

Janine is drawn to Walt's "bantam rooster" arrogance, but we're probably already confident it will be her undoing as well. Russo also develops a fair amount of sympathy for her position (IMHO). She knows it's all wrong, but she can't admit to it without accepting defeat. Her stubbornness is so understandable to me. It's not that she's justified in destroying the lives of all those around her, but I feel like Russo has imbued Janine's character with solid motivations for her actions.

It has been some years since I read Empire Falls (f2f book club, 9/2004), which was separated by a number more before I watched the movie, and I have no interest in re-reading EF right now, but I am very much enjoying the conversation here. As you finish, I'll try to make some comments on the residue the book left for me.

I would love to get a sense of how many people are reading this book, and/or following the discussion, and where people are in their reading. Anyone care to share their position?

I just hit Part II of the audiobook.

I'm also wondering if the fact that I'm not reading the print version has something to do with not reacting as strongly as Carl to the writing style. Narrated in a conversational tone, the prose takes on a very natural ebb and flow. Something to put in my thinking cap...

I was wondering about that very same thing, Daniel. I think it would be a vastly different experience listening to the book. I've stayed away from audiobooks because I want to maintain this false sense of control over pacing, and because I worry about missing something that I might need to ruminate over...maybe I should quit ruminating over the writing style and speed-read the book.

Carl: I totally understand the need to control pacing. There are plenty of books which I wouldn't even consider listening to in audio format. Empire Falls seemed like one where what was said was far more relevant than how it was being said. Perhaps more parable than art? In any case, I think I was right in choosing the audiobook here.

I often listen to audiobooks, though I usually end up buying a paper copy, too. I can think of two cases where the audiobook seriously enhanced my experience. Both were books with a lot of language that did not come naturally to me: The brief Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao, and NW by Zadie Smith. In both cases, the audiobook performers were very good, and their performances helped me understand aspects of the books I would otherwise have missed.

The right audiobook can be wonderful,and can amount to "found reading time" when I have too many books I want to read at the same time. Converting my driving time to "reading" time gets me, on average, about 45 minutes a day.

I did read EF, not listen to it (except later as a movie). But I did not and do not consider it a book worthy of pondering over language, i.e., a book for which speed reading might not be inappropriate. Yet, as I will try to say more about later, Daniel's comments about Janine and Walter surprised me with how vividly they returned memories of those characters -- and I don't think of myself as a reader who particularly remembers large numbers of characters from any particular book. Yet, between the book and the movie, I seem to do so for several in EF -- even if I might not be able to tell you their names!

Now, the question I ask myself: what were the characteristics of Russo's writing or the story itself or my associations that made such so. I will also be curious about reactions to the narrator himself as the stories unfold.

Just some thoughts...Provocative-is the author trying to provoke women by his depiction of women as hangers -on for the money and lifestyle (travelling to Europe)? This was written in 2001 when women were/are earning their own way. Pertinent-All the qualities that C.B. loves in his father are those depicted in today's CEO's and Wall Street executives.
I believe that a Pulitzer Prize winner will have lasting value in society that resonates then and now. So far, this book does that for me.

I tried this on audio. The narrator isn't bad, but I'm not getting any traction. I'm still in part one. Should I soldier through a bit longer?

Debrorah, I would recommend trying a bit longer, though possibly Carl would disagree with me. Part One is largely the very complicated set-up. After that, the interactions between and among the characters become much more interesting, or at least I thought so.

Maureen, I didn't really see it as depicting women in general as hangers-on. It seemed to me many of the female characters worked pretty hard, particularly Bea. Who do you see as "hangers-on"?

In the Prologue, Honus felt his wife didn't approve of him or where they lived, yet stayed with him anyway. Elijah tried to kill his wife yet she stayed. I interpreted the beginning as elitist, where money, power and prestige set up the "dynasty". Later characters were very different.

Honus and Elijah were in the past, well before 2001. The pertinent wife in 2001 would be Mrs. Whiting, who seems very involved in running her empire.

Casceil, excellent point.

I've just finished Part 1 and have to say I'm really enjoying this read. I can appreciate that some of the readers here are not taking to it at all, and finding his style a bit cumbersome. I've never read any of his previous books, but what strikes me most about this one so far is that he's a master storyteller. His style is quite old fashioned - a little like Irving perhaps? - but the characters he creates are so wonderfully human and real that I'm completely engaged by them and what may happen. This is one that I find I'm not reading between any lines, however. I'm just enjoying reading a great story well told

It is a great story well told. The characters are very real, and, as with real people you know, at some point you will start wondering about them--about their future interactions, their motives, how they will end up. Enjoy the book.