Having just finished
A
Little Life by Hanya Yanagihara with its 700+ pages, I got to thinking
about the other two novels of that length I read in the last two years. Here are my reviews of those tomes
: The
Goldfinch by Donna Tartt, which won the 2014 Pulitzer Prize for fiction, and
The Luminaries by Eleanor Catton,
which won the 2013 Man Booker Prize and the Governor-General’s Award for
Fiction. Does this bode well for
A Little Life?
Review of The Goldfinch by Donna Tartt 2 Stars
I finished this book with regret – regret that I had
invested so much of my time reading this 771-page tome. It has received many
rave reviews and was chosen as a Best Book of 2013 by the New York Times. Last
week it was at the top of the best seller list in Maclean’s. I am obviously in the minority, but I found it wordy and
pretentious.
Thirteen-year-old Theo Decker survives a bombing at an art
museum, but his mother is killed. He escapes without anyone noticing him and
takes with him The Goldfinch, a painting by a 17th-century Dutch painter. He is
provided a home by the family of a schoolmate before being taken to Las Vegas
by his father, a man whose personality is dominated by the addiction gene.
Later he moves in with Hobie, the business partner of a man who spoke his dying
words to Theo after the museum explosion and who (Theo believes) told him to
take the painting with him. As he drifts into adulthood, he keeps the painting
despite experiencing tremendous guilt about having it in his possession. Eventually
he is drawn into the criminal underworld which uses stolen masterpieces as
currency.
I was expecting the novel to examine the power of art on our
lives, and I was not disappointed in this regard. There are several discussions
of the impact of art. Hobie tells Theo, “’And isn’t the whole point of things –
beautiful things – that they connect you to some larger beauty’” (757)? Hobie
insists that a painting can change “’the way you see, and think, and feel’”
(758). For Theo, The Goldfinch is a thing of beauty but it also connects him to
his mother who loved the painting. At one point, he says that “The painting had
made me feel less mortal, less ordinary” (559). At the end, he summarizes that
“Whatever teaches us to talk to ourselves is important: whatever teaches us to
sing ourselves out of despair. But the painting has also taught me that we can
speak to each other across time” (771).
Theo, the narrator, is not a likeable person. At the
beginning one would have to be totally heartless not to sympathize with a child
who loses a parent he desperately loves after having been abandoned by a
selfish, unfaithful father. The Barbour family takes him in and provides him
with a home, but it is a temporary arrangement and Mrs. Barbour is not the
maternal type. When Theo’s father reappears, he proves to be anything but a
model parent. It becomes difficult to sympathize however, as Theo continues to
make one poor decision after another, well into adulthood. Even when provided
with a stable home and support and affection, Theo comes across as an ingrate
as he behaves in ways that put all that in jeopardy. One could make a plausible
argument that Theo suffers from post-traumatic stress, but from the very
beginning he wallows in self-pity and behaves in ways that are self-destructive
and hurtful to others; for example, after his father left, Theo engaged in
petty criminality even though the staff at his school was very supportive and
even though he understood the consequences for him and the hurt his beloved
mother would experience.
Then, in the end, he makes an appraisal of his role in
preserving art; arguing that love follows art through time, he decides that he
played a “bright, immutable part in that Immortality.” And he concludes with a
lofty statement: “And I add my own love to the history of people who have loved
beautiful things, and looked out for them, and pulled them from the fire, and
sought them when they were lost, and tried to preserve them and save them while
passing them along literally from hand to hand, singing out brilliantly from
the wreck of time to the next generation of lovers, and the next” (771). His
mother once said to him that “’anything we manage to save from history is a
miracle’” (28) and he implies that he has helped perform a miracle?! Oh please!
As a teen in Las Vegas, Theo meets Boris who has a
tremendous impact on Theo’s life. I found Boris unbelievable. He is fluent in
multiple languages and reads Dostoevsky even though he is drunk or high most of
the time? Hobie is another unbelievable character; in his case, he is just too
good to be true. When Theo finally admits to Hobie of an illegal scheme that
could have dire consequences for both him and Hobie, Hobie isn’t angry;
instead, he blames himself: “’I’m as much to blame for this as you’” (497).
When he later learns of Theo’s further criminality, he says, “’It does all
swing around strangely sometimes, doesn’t it? . . . How funny time is. How many
tricks and surprises’” (753).
The plotting is very slow and occasionally stretches
credibility. The description of the explosion’s aftermath made me wonder if
Theo would ever find his way out of the museum. And when he does, he manages to
get out without anyone seeing him? The drinking and drug use sessions in Las
Vegas go on and on. The descriptions of the effects of drugs become tedious in
their repetitiveness. The extensive tangents are unnecessary; for example, if I
were interested in furniture restoration, I’d consult non-fiction books written
by an expert in the field. Horst, “a bad junkie” (572) goes on for pages about
the technical skill of various artists. And the number of coincidences is
problematic. Boris, for instance, makes an appearance just when he is expected
to do so. There are so many coincidences that it seems the author feels she has
to justify them: “’Who was it said that coincidence was just God’s way of
remaining anonymous’” (758). Characters are always exchanging meaningful
glances: “A glance was exchanged – the heft of which I recognized instantly”
(531) and “They looked at each other and some unspoken something seemed to pass
between them” (570). The scenes in Amsterdam, those outside Theo’s hotel room,
are perfect for an action film but are not in the same genre as the rest of the
novel.
Much has been made of the style of the book. There is no
doubt that the author is intelligent and educated, but at times I sensed some
pretension. The number of literary and artistic allusions is impressive.
German, Russian, Polish, French and Dutch phrases are used. But is a sentence
of over 200 words really necessary (715)?
There were several times when I considered abandoning the
book; however, I kept hoping I would encounter something that would change my
largely negative opinion and that somehow the book, unlike the tethered
goldfinch in the painting, would be able to soar. It did not. At one point,
Theo describes the finch in the painting as “fluttering briefly, forced always
to land in the same hopeless place” (306). The book does the same.
Review of The Luminaries by Eleanor Catton 3 Stars
I picked up this tome with some trepidation; its length of
832 pages is daunting. What swayed me was its winning of both the 2013 Man
Booker Prize and the 2013 Governor-General’s Award for Fiction. After finishing
it, I would not have chosen it for these literary awards, but it is interesting
enough and will especially appeal to lovers of 19th-century novels.
This historical suspense is set in the 1860s during the gold
rush in New Zealand in a mining town on the South Island’s west coast. Twelve
men gather secretly to discuss three events that occurred two weeks earlier:
the death of a hermit, the disappearance of a young man, and a prostitute’s
near death due to drug overdose. Their meeting is interrupted by the arrival of
Walter Moody, a newcomer to the goldfields. In Part I of the novel, 360 pages,
they reveal what they know; each man has at least one piece of information the
others don’t; “No one man could really be called ‘guilty’, just as no one man
could really be called ‘innocent’” (350). In the rest of the novel, the men
seek out each other and tidbits of information emerge in their conversations.
Flashbacks help to give the back stories so that in the end the reader can
piece together a fairly complete picture of what transpired and why.
The variety of characters presented is wide: a whoremonger,
a Maori greenstone hunter, a Jewish newspaperman, a Chinese prospector, a
chaplain, a prostitute, a hotelier, a ship’s captain, a politician, a
magistrate, an opium dealer, a brothel owner, a gaoler, among others. In
keeping with the style of a 19th-century novel, straightforward character
appraisals and physical descriptions are given whenever a new person is
introduced. At times it was difficult to keep all the characters straight in my
mind, but the character chart at the beginning was helpful.
The book has all the accoutrements of a Dickensian plot:
long-lost siblings, murder, conspiracies, phantoms, assignations, secrets,
purloined letters, shipwrecks, lost treasure, eavesdropping, betrayals, a
séance, power plays, sex, opium, and love affairs. Of course there are numerous
chance encounters and coincidences. Moody even refers to the number of
coincidences: “’A string of coincidences is not a coincidence’? And what was a
coincidence . . . but a stilled moment in a sequence that had yet to be
explained” (350).
Because the plot is non-linear, the reader might find
him/herself becoming confused: “What a convoluted picture it was – and how
difficult to see, in its entirety” (343). Fortunately, the author assists a
great deal by occasionally offering recaps to make certain the reader has all the
details.
The style of the book is very much 19th-century. Besides the
blunt character descriptions and old-fashioned plot elements, the syntax is
that of the time period. Chapters are prefaced with synopses, expletives are
concealed with dashes, chapters end with cliff hangers, the narrator is
omniscient and intrusive, and the book even has a dark and stormy night
opening.
The structure of the narrative is complex. It is based on
the astrological calendar. There are twelve parts, and each part is half the
length of the previous. The first part has twelve chapters, and each part
thereafter has one less chapter so the last part has only one. All of this
suggests a waning moon, as further emphasized by the cover art. Also, the
various characters fade into the background as others ascend in influence. The
traits of the characters seem to be determined by their sun signs. The related
influence of the planetary figures (as mentioned in the character chart) is
particularly telling. I know little about astrology so there is probably much
that missed my notice. I will admit to some discomfort with the inclusion of
astral soul-mates (716).
This is a novel of plot, not a novel of character (since all
characters are static) or a novel of theme. There are, however, some
observations, mostly made by Moody – whose influence, appropriately, is Reason
– which serve as commentary on the human condition. The one topic on which he
repeatedly comments is the unknowability of the complete truth. He tells the
group of twelve that, “’one should never take another man’s truth for one’s
own’” and “’there are no whole truths, there are only pertinent truths – and
pertinence . . . is always a matter of perspective. . . . But your perspectives
are very many, and you will forgive me if I do not take your tale for something
whole’” (282). Later, he cautions himself that “a man ought never to trust
another man’s evaluation of a third man’s disposition” (392). The chaplain
agrees: “’If I have learned anything from experience, it is this: never
underestimate how extraordinarily difficult it is to understand a situation
from another person’s point of view’” (620 – 621). It is appropriate,
therefore, that in the end, there are some unanswered questions. The reader has
enough information to make a good guess as to who did what, but some
assumptions have to be made: “How opaque, the minds of absent men and women! And
how elusive, motivation.”
Having read other of the nominations for both the Man Booker
and the Governor-General’s Award, I do disagree with the final choices of the
judges. The Luminaries is an
interesting read with a complex plot and structure, and the author can be
commended for her research (e.g. elements of 19th-century fiction, astrology,
New Zealand gold rush) but, for me, it does not have the luminary quality I
expect of a book chosen to receive these prestigious awards.