owen is a kentucky millennial (young side). he considers himself a writer but all he writes are annotations of his days -- impressions, what happened,owen is a kentucky millennial (young side). he considers himself a writer but all he writes are annotations of his days -- impressions, what happened, stuff like that. he drifts at the outskirts of life, lives with his grandfather and his disabled uncle (in the dirty basement), has lukewarm relations with his mom and dad, grew up poor and money is still an issue, reads books by men, listens to music by men, watches films about men. since the third person narrator is very close to owen there is no reflection on owen's interior life, and owen, in some ways, is all externality. the details of his work (he's a groundskeeper at the local university), proper names of clothing, proper names as much as possible, specific nomenclature everywhere: machine parts, outfits, booze, trees, the details of his domestic life, kentucky.
specific nomenclature tend to give a thick flavor to narrative, like corn starch and sugar and cream. it can be used really well and really delightfully. here it's another layer of externality.
there is a love story, about which we learn nothing, even though many words are spent describing what happens between those two.
at the end, the empty core of this novel fills up, suddenly, dramatically, and i challenge you not to shed a little tear. you can keep love, and feelings, at bay only so much, only so long.
is it worth reading a whole novel of empty shell just for the emotional payoff? i think so, if you like the style. you will know immediately if you do (in truth, lee cole is a good and deft writer).
i just want to say that i can't imagine coming of age on the eve of trump's election, or during. the world took a sharp right turn. then it took a couple other. if i could concoct a shell in which to abscond, empty, i would....more
this is a nicely written love story, really two love stories mirroring each other, with gentle men and strong women. it's sweet. since in my more advathis is a nicely written love story, really two love stories mirroring each other, with gentle men and strong women. it's sweet. since in my more advanced age i only want love stories to be between queer people this is not quite for me, but if you love straight love stories, give it a read....more
i read every single word of this book, in fact, i listened to every single word of this book, which for some doesn't count as reading, but surely it mi read every single word of this book, in fact, i listened to every single word of this book, which for some doesn't count as reading, but surely it must count as listening -- so this is what i did, i listened to this book, carefully, raptly i dare say, and when i wasn't sure i had understood exactly what was being said i went back and listened again. i think i can honestly say that, in this fashion, i listened to it twice (i also slowed it down a bit to understand better). i put some good hours into this book, is what i am saying. this is a necessary premise cuz a ton of people have felt authorized to pronounce about this book without having read it or having read only a bit of it. nope, not me, i read the whole thing.
sandra newman's imagination is wild and unruly. this is my opinion, which is based on reading two more of her books and also her tweets. she is an imaginative force of nature. this book is wild and unruly, bites way more than it can chew, tackles everything but the kitchen sink, and leaves you entirely dazed and mystified.
this is what this book is not particularly interested in (again, in my opinion, based on above):
- gender
i have no earthly idea why newman decided to start the book with the disappearance of all men, and why she decided that "man" was someone with a Y chromosome, thus ignoring the key gender-identifying elements of personal choice, self-identification, genetic variations, and social positioning. the outcome is that a whole lot of men stay and a whole lot of women go. my guess is that someone told sandra that, hey, this may rub some folks up the wrong way, to which she responded by adding lines here and there that indicated she was aware this was not the ideal way to split men from women.
but the thing is, it really doesn't matter. because NOTHING in the book would be different if the men had stayed. and the reason for this is that newman chooses to tell the story of basically two characters, whose past is full of men obviously, and whose present is, yes, affected by the lack of (some) man around, but also, not really? imagine every scene and then imagine all men being around, and nothing will change. nothing, you might say, but the last scene. and i'll tell you that (view spoiler)[female cops kill people too (hide spoiler)]. there, problem solved. ((view spoiler)[precisely because female cops kill people too, that scene and all that plays out around it makes no sense; next time have the cops disappear, sandra (hide spoiler)]).
the men who disappear show up in a series of surrealistic films shot apparently in real time and streaming on the internet. they are set in the future (yes, the timeline is wonky). the future is grim. in the meantime, with most men gone, the narrow corner of the world newman exposes us to (the book is startlingly uninterested in the wide world) is less polluted and busy, probably under the rationale that men do most of the technical work of getting gas and coal out of the earth and running engines and large industrial complexes. that's it. that's all the absence of most men does. the thing under spoiler tags and less pollution and traffic.
well, there is also the fact that women walk around less scared or decidedly not scared, dressed any which way they like, something i frankly thought quite desirable and true (fuck you, violent patriarchy).
what this book is more interested in:
- lesbian relations - madness - trauma - incarceration (the incarceration of women in particular) - anti-black violence on the part of the police and white people, male and female
if you think this is too much to tackle in one book, you are right. if you think it's tackled fast and furiously, you are right too.
i like that a white woman decided to address head-on white people's violence against black people. it should be done more often. i don't know newman does it well. she does it from the pov of a black woman, and i think white people should do a lot more work addressing the white pov, but hey, A for effort.
would i re-read this book? YES. sandra newman is a phenomenal writer and even when her books are messy they are worth reading. at the very least, they are fun and gripping, they touch you in the feels, and they make you think.
would i recommend it to you? why yes i would. give it a try. see what you think. come back and tell me. if you read less than 100% of the book tho, i may not want to engage with you. cuz that's silly, isn't it. the whole damn thing is so silly....more
Loading...
