BookFellas discussion

Q. – After reading The Underground Railroad, what is your reaction to it?

1. This isn’t your mom’s Uncle Tom’s Cabin.
2. Don’t read it, wait for the movie.
3. It stands up to the hype.
4. Whitehead is a genius.

M: I would have to go with a combination of #1 and #4. The book wasn’t anything I suspected it would be. In some ways, this was disappointing, but in others it proved that Whitehead is much smarter than I am (in case anyone was doubting).

R: I’m somewhere on the fence on this one, too. Now, I think Whitehead is a genius (I mean, he was award the MacArthur), and I’m a fan of his work. But (and there’s always a but) this one, while good, even great, I don’t know if stands up to the hype (not overrated, per say, just the hype). I’ve read it twice now, and each time I’ve enjoyed it (I’d say more so the second go round), but it didn’t leave me with that “Wow” like some of his other novels or National Book Award winners.

Q. – How does the portrayal of slavery in the book compare to other works (like Uncle Tom’s Cabin)?

M: I think Whitehead’s portrayal of slavery is one of the strengths of the book. Some of the scenes were gut-wrenching to imagine. He did a wonderful job of describing the human cost of slavery in our nation.

R: Alright, confession: I’ve never read Uncle Tom’s Cabin. But I have seen 12 Years a Slave (which came to mind first). And I think it compares accurately. Especially in terms of the viciousness of man—Terrance Randall vs Edwin Epps—the violence, and the fear: the overall horror of the time.

Q. – An important theme of The Underground Railroad was the treatment of slaves as property. Did this give you a better understanding of slavery in the United States?

M: I remember history classes that discussed slavery, but it was more of a sterile depiction. Whitehead’s skill in painting the picture of slaves as property to be bought, sold, and discarded is particularly poignant. He enhanced my understanding of slavery from my history classes in school and put a human side to it.

R: It’s hard to witness suffering. So I don’t know if bettered my understanding, but it definitely showed a wider perspectives. This is one of the aspects I enjoyed about the novel. While mainly told through Cora, Whitehead bookended chapters by turning supporting characters into main ones. This allowed us, the readers, to gain insights into not only Cora (her lineage, from Ajarry to Mabel) but how slavery effected gravediggers and closeted sympathizers.

Q. – One of the constants of the book are the jolting surprises in it. Things can be going well, then all of a sudden, we are confronted with a sudden tragedy or emotional conflict. How did this strike you as a reader?

M: While I was jolted multiple times, I liked the style that the author used. I must say that I was not expecting many of the emotional twists and turns that occurred in the novel. It did make for a more interesting read, however.

R: I liked the jolts and style as well. It’s a gift to veil certain deus ex machinas to keep us turning pages (like meeting Royal and Redd in the nick of time). I applaud his ability to keep me so engaged after some scene that lead me to ask myself, “now what?”

Q. – Who do you connect with the most in the novel and why?

M: I would say Caesar. His love of reading and his previous experience of freedom drew me to him as a character. This experience no doubt fueled his desire to escape to the north. I would hope that I would have the same determination to escape slavery if I were in his shoes.

R: I don’t know if I connected on any particular character as a whole, rather connecting with traits. I enjoyed Sam, his jovial personality and spy like position in society. But I also empathized with Ethel Wells. One of the shining points of the novel is how Whitehead structures it. At first I wasn’t too big of an Ethel fan, but when he narrates her aside and we see her want to do good in this world and her inability to do so, I feel that’s a facet that hits home for many people on a large and small scale.

Q. – What did you think of the state-by-state structure of the storyline? Was this unique to you? Did it add to the story or detract from it?

M: I like geography, so I am a fan of the state-by-state structure of the novel. It made the story come to life more as a result. It added to the story also because of the constantly new characters being introduced in each state. On a side note, it didn’t do much to improve my opinion of North Carolina .

R: I’m a fan of the state-by-state storyline. While I don’t know if it was particularly “unique,” I think it’s an effective way to structure a novel about a journey.

Q. – Why do you think Whitehead chose to depict a literal underground railroad? How did this impact your previous understanding of the historical underground railroad?

M: I’m not sure why. Maybe he just wanted to provide something more tangible to what our understanding of the actual underground railroad. In any event, it is a creative literary tactic. I like all of the symbolism the literal railroad evoked.

R: I’m about to get all Lit Major: one interpretation has to do with the “seeing the country” line one of the station agents said. It brings the connotation of a leisurely trip, but for Cora is was anything but. However, it also shows what was built (here, literally) under such horrible oppression. Now, I thought the idea itself could be taken further. I was surprised by how little railroad there seemed to be in the book. But as a symbol, it’s inclusion added a tangible aspect to the human spirit.

Q. – Whitehead earned many awards for The Underground Railroad. This generated much hype about the book. Do you think it lived up to the hype? Finally, would you recommend it to others?

M: Here’s where I’m going to be negative. While I liked some aspects of the book (as mentioned above), I was let down overall. I was disappointed in Whitehead’s use of anachronisms, such as the use of eugenics and also that of an elevator, neither of which were known at the time when the novel was set. I’m sure he did this for a reason, but the overall effect was disappointing to me. In short, I think it is overhyped. It was OK, but not nearly as magnificent as it was made out to be. I probably would not recommend it. I give it 2 stars.

R: I went on a small harangue about the hype (again, just hyped, not overrated) so here can I speak on the awards it garnered and my surprise in its winning the Arthur C. Clarke Award for Science Fiction? Anyway—overall I enjoyed the novel (again) and would recommended with a solid 4 out of 5.