|
Ambiguity is one of
those words that I only understand in context. As a stand-alone word,
it's slippery and ever-morphing. I'd be hard-pressed to come up with
a solid definition off the top of my head, yet I know it when I see
it.
This novel, not unlike the word itself, seems to insinuate itself
in the cracks of my brain, not really leaving an impression so much
as trails of substance in the corners of my vision. Every time I thought
I had a handle on what Elliot Perlman was trying to pull off, someone
threw that softball at the little metal target and I was dunked into
a tank of cold murky water. Not being all that practiced in my metaphors,
I'm sure this one is deficient in more ways than you can count, but
it's the best way I can describe the way I felt for large chunks of
the narrative.
The story itself is a simple one. A lonely, desperate and delusional
man, Simon, steals the child of an ex-girlfriend, takes him home to
his apartment and gives him chocolate milk. Really, that's the story.
The larger idea of why he did it, and who feels the repercussions,
is the text that fills up the 600 some odd pages.
Wrapped up in this little plot is the hooker friend of Simon the child-stealer.
That hooker friend also happens to have the husband of the ex-girlfriend
(and father of the stolen child) as a long-time regular client. These
four are really the core characters, along with Simon's shrink, Alex,
who eventually becomes his advocate when Simon is arrested for the
kidnapping of the child. There is also a co-worker of the husband,
and the eventual adult child of the shrink. I think that makes seven.
Being a total sucker for interesting narrative structures, I do like
the way the book is set up, telling an overlapping story from seven
different perspectives. As each of the seven characters continues
the semi-linear story, we uncover nuances the last character held
back, omitted or outright lied about. I do think that the author could
have pushed this a bit more, as it really would have given us some
insight into human nature and their propensity to explain away things
that their brains can't deal with. Ultimately, though, can we really
trust any of the narrators? Funny enough, the author doesn't really
give us that sense of ambiguity that we crave, akin to the story told
by Verbal Kint in The
Usual Suspects. So rather then creating ambiguity, the author
played it more straight and used the technique to reveal truths and
uncover lies rather than cause doubt in the mind of the reader.
I know it sounds weird, but sometimes a little bit of doubt is okay.
What the hell happened at the end of Rocky
III after Clubber ding-dinged? It's that speculation and lack
of clarity that sometimes drives the most compelling storylines. Too
often Perlman got bogged down in his own convoluted psychobabble,
mired in high-minded pabulum that seemed more appropriate for a textbook
or lecture than a book. This is where a good editor should have stepped
in and trimmed the fat a little. There were literally times where
I could think of nothing but the old Pitfall game and those damn quicksand
traps. I would be sitting there slogging through some impenetrable
page and the little 8-bit jungle dude would scramble across the page
and get stuck right there on page 423 in the paragraph about brain
synapses or whatever.
If I were to ever write a book the first thing I'd do is find a really
good editor. The second thing I'd do is steal this narrative structure
and put it to better use. There are bits of this book that really
shine, but in the end, despite the story's simplicity, it couldn't
overcome its dense and serious subject matter. Oh, and the lead character,
Simon, is (most likely unintentionally) a borderline psychotic whiny
shithead who I found pratically impossible to like.
|