Moving away from portraying a community (Spoon River, Winesburg, and The Women of Brewster Place) or a family (Monkeys and Garcia Girls), Tom Perrotta offers us another possibility in the genre of the story cycle. His Bad Haircut follows the same protagonist, Buddy, from the first person point of view, and covers the period between 1969 and 1980, with the bulk of the collection dealing with his high school years.
Like Monkeys, there is not much “interconnectedness” because the whole collection is told from the single point of view of Buddy instead of from various perspectives. Also, characters don’t reappear and one story doesn’t affect other stories. There are, as far as I’m aware, only two instances of references within the collection: in “Snowman,” the basketball Buddy stole in the previous story appears briefly (p.89), and in “The Jane Pasco Fan Club,” he mentions Laura Daly from the previous story. In other words, the collection is more “episodic” than “interconnected” and the stories themselves remain fairly independent.
This brings up another point about the looseness of the collection and its novelistic characteristic. Like the stories of Winesburg, Ohio, the stories of Bad Haircut are loose and can stand on their own, but like those of Monkeys and How the Garcia Girls Lost Their Accents, they tell much more when read together than when they are read separately. Because we follow Buddy as he grows up and faces sex, relationships, drugs, and death, our understanding of the character is deepened by the end. But understanding Buddy doesn’t mean we see him change fundamentally. Throughout the collection, he remains ultimately a “spectator,” as driver’s ed teacher aptly calls him in “You Start to Live.” He is “happy to just stand around and watch,” and he doesn’t “take charge of the situation” (p.136). He stays this way from the beginning to the end, and none of his encounters with other characters, or his experience of the death of his neighbor in the final story seems to have much effect on him. He also doesn’t seem to have much agency throughout the collection and we don’t see him in a position to make a difficult choice and change because of it. That is, we see him grow, but not change fundamentally.
This leads to an interesting feature of this collection and the previous two books: their whole is greater than their parts. I would probably add this to the list of characteristics that novelistic collections share. And so to compile the list again, a collection of interconnected stories is said to be “novelistic” when it has one or more of the following:
1) A fundamental change to the place and/or the community or the protagonist;
2) A bringing together of different narrative threads where the reader sees all the main characters;
3) A communal action as the climax.
4) The stories, when read together, tell more than when they are read independently, usually deepening the reader’s understanding of the character(s).
Given this list, is Bad Haircut a coming-of-age novel? Though it certainly has a novelistic feature (#4), it’s closer to the story cycle end of the spectrum. So I’d resist the label “novel” with respect to this book and call it a coming-of-age story cycle.
A story cycle, then, is any collection of loosely held stories organized around some single location or set of characters, and it may have one or more of the characteristics listed above. Which is to say all the books we have read so far are story cycles, but some are more novelistic than others. The Women of Brewster Place is definitely the most novelistic of all, and Bad Haircut the least, though it does have a novelistic characteristic. The important point here is that any given story cycle, or collection of interconnected short stories, can share the characteristics of the novel listed above and place itself closer or farther away from the novel. And if a story cycle has enough characteristics of the novel, it can be called a “novel” (or “a novel in stories”). How many are enough? Since the distinction of “novel” in the case of story cycles runs in a spectrum, it’s ultimately up to the author or the reader to decide.
Moving onto another topic, one technical lesson to be learned from Bad Haircut is that the main character of a story cycle needs to be likable, which may translate to “inoffensive.” Buddy is an inoffensive character who manages to get into a lot of trouble, almost always getting dragged into it. But more importantly, what makes him likable is probably his humor that comes across in his prose. So for example in “Snowman,” when he fights with the lifeguard and rolls down the hill, he tells us: “He pounded me ineffectually on the back while I bled profusely on his coat, rubbing my nose with malicious pleasure back and forth across the sheepskin until I was almost drunk from the smell of it” (71).
More than Monkeys or How the Garcia Girls Lost Their Accents, Perotta’s Bad Haircut shows a unique advantage of the story cycle: it offers the writer a greater freedom to explore a historical period. First, the inherent looseness of the form allows for the freedom to write whatever you want without having to adhere to a pre-planned outline of events or a dominant story arc. Also, because the protagonist is the same throughout, there’s no need to forcefully connect characters as the writer jumps from one year to the next. This means you can write about various aspects of the period without worrying about plot or larger issues while at the same time being able to give the reader a sense of character growth and a deeper understanding of the protagonist. The only thing the writer needs to do is to move the stories through a period, as Perotta does through the seventies.
This advantage may be pronounced in the first person cycle like in Bad Haircut. First, the sense of character growth is probably greater with one central protagonist than, say, a family. Second, speaking of practicality, it might be easier or more manageable to focus on a single main character throughout since you don’t have to keep track of a large cast of characters (as in Monkeys), or figure out what each member is doing every time you move to the next story.
Overall, Bad Haircut showed me another strength of the genre, and broadened my understanding of the story cycle and its relationship to the novel.