Warning, craft review! Karr employs or deploys a number of craft strategies and techniques that I examined in order to rip-off for my own writing. I whittled down the many to these few:
• Prologues as context, anchoring (and/ or launching?) points
for both writer and reader, and how the prologues determine
the economy of explanation throughout the book;
• Management of present- and past-self narrators, for story, for
suspense, and other effects;
• Cognitive entry points (the deft turns-of-phrase Karr uses to
access—or to seem to access and thereby weave in—memory);
• Use of parenthetical statements as a device for interrogating
her own memory, calling bull shit on herself, and/or adding
another layer of subjectivity.
With the prologues, we encounter an open letter to Karr’s son, which answers the vital narrator questions outlined by writer David Mura (in a presentation I attended at the Stonecoast Residency) (Who? To Whom? When? Why?) The reader is immediately oriented. Perhaps just as important, these prologues also locate the writer—provide her with narrative marching orders. If she should forget, Karr’s prologue can remind her of who is telling the story, to whom, when, and why. And as writers, we do forget: we get bogged down in minutiae or umpteen other concerns and forget the larger shape of our stories.
In the first prologue, “SIDE A: NOW,” Karr launches the ‘I’ into a place of intimacy, closeness, truth (no bullshit), tenderness, and regret; she’s writing to her son, and as a result, the narrator’s calibrations are finely tuned in the way that only family can hear them fully. And yet, the reader is not left outside because Karr knows that, as Joyce observed, the universal is rendered in the particular, or in this case, a universal pain is rendered in Karr’s idiosyncratic voice—Texas-shit-kicker-cum-Harvard-poet.
We are invited eavesdroppers. Contextualizing the book in this way (as letter to son) also forces Karr to write from a place of love and tenderness. It forces a level of honesty beyond Karr’s obvious honesty and snarkiness—into emotional honesty that isn’t clever or well-spoken. It is in these moments when I stop marveling at the writer and take in the human being; for example, while visiting the sober house, the narrator finds herself confessing deep, clichéd fears: “For some reason, my eyes well up, and I find myself saying to women I just met, I’m afraid I’m not a good mom”(242). Writing the prologue to her son keeps the narrator accountable to this level of emotional honesty. At a minimum, it keeps the bar high.
Also clarified by the prologue is the economy of explanation. The audience for the prologue is an intimate, and someone to whom she is making amends. I don’t know if anyone ever asked Karr if she thinks of Lit as a 9th step of sorts, but I’d be interested to hear her answer. Answering the narrative questions serve to clarify the story. This is a story of redemption and self-definition from mother to son, and why and how the mother tells it, is to free them both. If ever Karr got unclear about who, what, when, to whom, and why, she could just look at this line, which I see as the underpinning refrain of the book: “Maybe by telling you my story, you can better tell yours, which is the only way to get home, by which I mean to get free of us” (6).
Of course the book is her own journey to get free—of her family story, of her own alcoholism—to get home. I think all writing is about going home—we go deeper inward to bring truth outward.
I admired, too, the way Karr seamlessly threaded both her present and past narrative selves--whether with a sentence or a paragraph, or sometimes just a phrase. She makes such a transition at the end of the second chapter, right after her so-called college “interview” in which being fondled is the price of admission. We are in that scene, and then we are out, with a spry-witted turn: “With his trembling and sweaty hand, he cupped first one breast, then the other, saying, By God, they’re real! Such was the interview that landed me in a school far beyond my meager qualifications” (32). Seemingly all at once, we are firmly in the past moment, then we are looking back on it, and then even looking forward from it.
When she first meets Walt, Karr manages well the tension that can be exploited with narrator. The past narrative self doesn’t know that he’s a good guy, but the present narrating self does: “My department collects strays, he said. Stop by my office tonight. We’ll see what we can find. But during the day, the prospect slid back and forth like a BB. Why did he want to see me at night? Leaving my library job, I faced sparse snow on the ground, scraped at by winds like straight razors” (37). What menacing! But Walt proves harmless.
Karr manipulates this tension frequently, and by quick turns, so as to keep the energy of the story up without seeming like a predatory narrator.
Another example (and one of my favorites) comes when she and some other drunks are car-pooling to an outside meeting and she suspects the driver is drunk. (This is known as a commitment in and around Boston, meaning the group is committing itself to serve another group, but when I first heard it, I immediately thought commitment, as in to be committed…to a nuthouse.) She captures AA so wonderfully, with such humor and depth and reverence, I want to read it through once more just for that. As she steps into the car, her present narrating self smells juniper, a hallmark of gin, but she talks herself out of her instincts. Fumblingly, he lights a cigarette, and the present narrating self declares, “This, I think, is as drunk a motherfucker as I’ve ever seen, fixing to steer the car I’m in. As a kid, I was trained to give the shitfaced room” (230). They end up driving to the meeting hall, with the reader still in suspense; the reveal comes a few pages later (the narrator was right!) when they find the drunk motherfucker passed out under a tree.
I’ll make my last two observations quickly, but I want to note them at least. Karr maneuvers her thinking with either physical objects or with cognition itself as a tangible object, wherein she holds the thing or thought in her hand, her mind, her gaze, and uses it as a Chutes-and-Ladders-esque entry point into some other thought, memory, scene, or image. Right off, in the prologue, she regards a videotape while thinking of her son’s leaving: “So after you’d gone, I played it—maybe for the first time all the way through. It’s a summer afternoon in a yellow kitchen we’ve yet to remodel.” She drops us right into the scene.
She does it again in the next prologue by using the red camera eye as an entry point. She uses a triangle of a book page (Lorca) a bit later on, as a vehicle for thought, for movement into memory. It’s a device of Nabokov’s, his inimitable madeleine cookie moment from Speak, Memory, and Karr uses it just as expertly, as a mode of transporting the reader and as a pivot point for reflection.
Finally, I admired how Karr used a parenthetical third narrator. I have been attempting this, without being fully conscious of it in my own work, particularly in managing information I learn later from third parties or from court documents. It adds so much depth to Karr’s already rich voice, and it did so leanly—in these seeming asides. But the asides by virtue of their repetition begin to take on weight, and because their function changes—from true aside to longer note, they begin to seem like highlighted grafts of language. They begin to function as another lens of subjectivity, which ultimately makes her narrator all the more reliable.
One striking example comes as Karr sits prostrate before a toilet bowl, having just checked herself into the bin. It’s characteristic Karr to be self-conscious about such a moment, and she is, and further she acknowledges this self-consciousness on the page, in a sort of screenplay aside that appears in parentheses: “(Vis-à-vis God speaking to me, I don’t mean the voice of Charlton Heston playing Moses booming from on high, but reversals of attitude so contrary to my typical thoughts—so solidly true—as to seem divinely external. And quiet these thoughts are, strong and quiet. View it as some sane self or healthy ego taking charge, if you like. By checking in to the hospital, I’ve said in some deep way uncle, or—as they said in my old neighborhood—calf rope, referring to an animal hogtied in a rodeo arena. I’ve stopped figuring so hard and begun to wait, sometimes with increasing hope, to be shown)” (276).