Category Archives: Bestseller

Annabel: Bridging Difference

The question in Kathleen Winter’s debut novel, Annabel, is not what is the novel about, but who. I don’t mean that because the protagonist Wayne is born intersexed and so the novel explores his dual identity as both Wayne and Annabel: both-and. No, I mean the question who is this novel about because while the text is ostensibly occupied with exploring Wayne/Annabel’s sense of identity, it is even more preoccupied with how his father Treadway, her mothers (both biological and metaphorical) Jacinta and Thomasina, and his friend, Wally navigate their identities in relation to one another.

In other words, the novel asks readers to think about how they, too, are formed and reformed in relation to others and how our ideas about who and how other people should be shapes our behaviour and sense of self. That is to say, how I understand myself will always be an understanding (pre)deteremined by who you are and how you (re)present yourself. The novel makes sure readers understand that this complicated way of being – in relation to others and in negotiation with the self – comes with material and psychological challenges and consequences. To be, to understand yourself, as flux and shaped by others and your surroundings, is painful and messy; it is also, in this book at least, the only honest way to live, the only way to live at all.

Beyond relations-between-people, the novel explores how self is shaped by place, history, occupation, heritage. By broadening the scope of focus from Wayne/Annabel’s discovery-of-self to encompass (in a much richer way) the negotiated identities of Jacinta, Wally, Thomasina and Treadway, the novel shows how it is not simply those with overtly or demonstrably complex identities who must work at identity, but rather is is all of us who must negotiate and navigate who we are, how we are received and shaped by the world, and how we want to be both seen and identified.

The novel achieves this broadened understanding  through shifting narrative point of view, but also through the deliberate choices and plot sequences of each of these characters that allow the reader to wonder who the novel is really about (and I suspect it’s meant to be about each of us as readers).

While I was clearly taken with the characters and thematic questions, the writing is a demonstration – for anyone taking their first creative writing class – of the proverbial “show, don’t tell” (don’t tell me someone is angry, show it to me by describing the way they make tea). Usually you want authors to do this sort of showing – you want character to be unfolded in action and scene, not in overt description. That said, this novel tipped just a little too far (for me anyway) in the “showing” in that it read – on occasion – like the first year creative writing exercise. A bit too showy. Which isn’t to say the writing is lacking – no, there are some poignant, beautiful descriptions. The showing of character through action really does make for rich scenes. All this to say it’s good writing, but good writing trying very hard to be great writing (without letting you think that it’s trying to be great writing) (perhaps this is commentary on Can Lit? Or first novels?).

The “bridge” metaphor that weaves through the text asks readers to think about the ways we each cross (mix, overlap, traverse and confuse) and join ourselves to ourselves, to one another and to our place/space. The novel operates as its bridge metaphor demands: it offers a bridge to think about and question our sense of self, our relationship to history and place, and our commitments to understanding and shaping one another.

Annabel was up for Canada Reads this year, and lost out to Joseph Boyden’s The OrendaI don’t know how I feel about national reading campaigns generally – I think there are probably some books that most people should read (what are these books? question for another post) and that the criteria for this proclamation of “you should read this!” should include whether the book tells us something about how to be… better to one another, how to contribute to our communities and how to understand ourselves and others. Annabel does these things very, very well. So while I don’t carry the same force as Jian Ghomeshi (alas) I do urge you to read Annabel and to think about who the novel is about (and to recognize, perhaps, that it’s also about you).

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Bestseller, Book Club, Canadian Literature, Fiction, Prize Winner

The Luminaries: When do you quit reading?

polldaddy poll=8035045]

So I sort of didn’t like (at all) Eleanor Catton’s The Luminaries. Sure, sure, it won the 2013 Booker Prize. As if a prize committee has never been wrong.

I tried. I really did. 350 pages worth of trying (it’s a 700 odd page book – actually not odd, hold that thought) and I quit. Sure, my quitting this book is indicative of larger patterns in my life (I haven’t yet found a hobby I won’t quit after six months of being totally enraptured: rock climbing! quilting! karate!), but in this instance the book deserved to be quit. I’ll illuminate (ha! get it?) the problems, but first I want to think about why we read books we aren’t enjoying or don’t find meritorious/worthy of reading. Is it masochism? Some sense that because it won a Booker I have to be an idiot for not enjoying it (let’s not discount this as a possibility)? The expectation that maybe it will get better? The feeling that you’ve already committed so much that it would be a waste to stop now? <– this definitely applies to marathon running

So what was my problem? Why wasn’t I the kind of reader who swooned for this piece of historical fiction? There was too much. Too much writing, too much plot, too many characters, too many threads, too many Ideas (like the page counts of chapters should mirror the phases of the moon?). Too little to care about – what was this book about if not solving three weird coincidences? I’m not all that interested in coincidences. Or why they happen. Or for 700 pages. Winding, weaving, blerg. Just… too much (and not like it was thematically interested in ideas of “excess” so I could appreciate the form/content blend – just… too much.)

I should end by saying I didn’t hate all of it. Having played “Industry: The New Zealand Game” on the instance of N. I was familiar with the history of the gold rush and so I enjoyed feeling like a reader-in-the-know (clearly I should have been familiar with this history as a Person Living in the World, but my sense of world history and geography is patchy and for this I am sorry). I enjoyed the mood of the book – I was persuaded by the ill-omens and the murky murk that nothing good was going to happen.

Leave a comment

Filed under Bestseller, Prize Winner, Worst Books

Quiet – The Power of Introverts in a World that Can’t Stop Talking: Am I an Introvert?

My physiotherapist – an introvert – recommended this book to me. I see her twice a week (mostly) and I love her, so I took on reading non-fiction (gross) so that I could tell her about what I thought in one of our many sessions attempting to fix my [unfixable?] feet. This desire to talk-books is, most often, why I read books recommended: I want to read the thing that is important to the people I care about so that I can share it with them, talk to them about it, compare notes. (The exceptions, of course, are when N. or my mum recommend books. I trust their judgement implicitly. Though I’m stumbling my way through Gravity’s Rainbow right now in ways that make me think N. might be wrong for the first time ever. I suspend judgement.).

Right. Enough on books recommended (though  I do extend the offer again to tell me what I should read and why) and more on Susan Cain’s Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World that Can’t Stop Talking. I was telling my friend M. that I was reading Cain’s book and that on reading it I’d come to think that I might be an introvert. She laughed at me and told me that anyone who reads as much as I do has to be an introvert. Having finished the book I’m not more certain of “what” I am, though more sure of the circumstances that make me more and less likely to behave as if I am an introvert. Certainly more ideas about how I might approach the idea of introverts in my classrooms (more on that in a minute).

What I liked about Cain’s book is the way she allows that people cannot be reduced to a personality trait. That in particular situations we can behave and act in whatever way the context requires. We might just have a preference or an inclination one way or another. The idea of how introverts and extroverts gain energy – time alone and time with others, respectively – also resonated. Her message that our cultural preference for extroverts has reduced introverted behaviours to shameful or apologetic activities also appealed to me on an instinctual level “you’re right! I shouldn’t have to feel guilty for wanting to stay home and read in the tub on a Friday night!” Though I’m suspicious of the science – or at least her presentation of the science – which was as more anecdotal than it was peer reviewed.

But here’s the thing with such books – people read them (and boy are they reading this one) because it explains something people feel. There’s a difference among people – the people person, the shy one, the whatever – and that such an argument presents a comforting explanation for when things don’t go the way we wanted or anticipated “well of course she didn’t hire me, I’m an introvert.” These sort of pat assurances reduce our sense of ourselves to a predetermined or unimpeachable excuse. Cain does make useful distinctions among introvert, shy and sensitive that were refreshing and nuanced. She, too, takes care to argue that being an introvert provides great benefit. But I’m wary of the explanatory power of such books. That students – or others – will explain away their behaviour – of their lack of acting – because “I’m an introvert.” Like learning styles (no actual evidence for learning styles, btw) the idea of introvert-extrovert can be taken to an extreme where it forgets that there are circumstances wherein reflection is required – and everyone should learn how to do it – just as there are circumstances where being engaged with other people (ew) is required – and everyone should learn how to do it.

All this to say the book was helpful in making sense of some of my partner, S. (an clear Cain introvert)’s behaviours. Just as it was helpful in thinking about incorporating more taught-reflection and taught-introspection into my classes. I’m just wary of grand declarations of who we are that explain away behaviour that really does deserve – an introverted! – consideration.

Leave a comment

Filed under Bestseller, Non-fiction

Game of Thrones: Worth the Wait

       So in the end I might have spent more time reading over the Christmas holiday then I did with my family, but happily my family loves to read, too, and so didn’t mind (or at least claimed not to mind) when I retreated to my room for several hours to get caught up in the world of George RR Martin’s A Song of Fire and Ice series. “Caught up” might be something of an understatement, as I found myself reading until 2, 3, 4am with eyes propped open rather than quitting the seductive, mysterious and utterly ruthless world of the Seven Kingdoms (and beyond).

I admit that the first six or seven chapters were something of a struggle as I tried to keep track of the scores of characters that get introduced at something of a whirlwind rate. I’d suggest for new readers to bookmark the appendix that lists the relationship of all characters, or failing that, to make their own list. I’m sure this is my own failing and not that of the text, but I do think there’s something to be said for slowing the introductory pace just a little so as to allow readers the chance to become somewhat more familiar with characters before they are jerked into another sequence.

That said, one cheery consequence of a rapid introduction is that the reader isn’t offered the chance to fall completely smitten with one character or another, and so loyalties are early divided in a text that does not follow the usual trajectory of ‘good guys’ and ‘bad guys,’ but rather suggests that loyalties (and characters!) will shift depending on characters’ actions and evolving relationships.

The usual cadre of knights, princesses, dragons, swords and sworn allegiances make for an intoxicating plot and atmosphere. But it isn’t the well paced plot that  makes Game of Thrones totally irresistible (to me) it is the characters who make catastrophic errors, who act without honour, who deceive themselves and others – in other words characters who are human rather than fantastical archetypes.

I’m promising to alternate a book from Fire and Ice with another book recommended so that I don’t find myself lost in the Seven Kingdoms until March, but it won’t be easy.

Leave a comment

Filed under American literature, Bestseller, Fiction