David Feldman answers “Am I the only numb nuts that didn't get...”

Angie Annetts asked this question about The Vegetarian:

Am I the only numb nuts that didn't get the ending?

David Feldman In journalism the word story can mean at least two different things: an actual connected sequence of events, or the text or article that reports that …moreIn journalism the word story can mean at least two different things: an actual connected sequence of events, or the text or article that reports that sequence. Most people understand the purpose of such texts or articles as the accurate communication of actual events, but the publisher may see selling papers or advertising as the deeper purpose. And some philosophers even doubt the existence of "an actual sequence of events," and assert that we actually live in world of texts and other representations.

Many readers approach reading a novel as they would a newspaper article, and build in their minds a sequence of events that the novel reports. Of course no such actual events exist, we only have the text. Authors have widely embraced this truism since at least the beginning of the 20th century and toyed with it. Certainly the purpose of a novel consists of something different than merely accurately reporting a sequence of event. Generally one might say it lies with creating an experience for the reader. The text might contradict itself and thus manifestly not represent even a sequence of merely possible events. The text may embrace ambiguities and thus simultaneously represent several very different possible sequences of events. The author might even embrace the we-live-in-a-world-of-texts philosophy, and thus tell the stories of the stories different characters construct each from their own viewpoint.

The Vegetarian, at least in translation, mostly relies on very simple language, as direct as that we associate with journalism. This encourages the reader to build mentally a world about which the book seems to report. But where the book really works on the reader, it veers, but only briefly, into heightened language more like poetry. Dreams play a key role, and no sharp boundary divides dreams from purported events.

Mr. Cheong, the unnamed video artist, and In-hye each seem to have their own realities. Of course, Yeong-hye too, but she practically never gets her say. Since she unites the whole novel, I found the novel affected me by inducing the wish to hear her viewpoint, particularly because the other characters seem so manifestly unable to hear her.

For me the trick of the ending goes like this: as Yeong-hye fully becomes a tree, In-hye begins to become Yeong-hye. As a reader I first build and then surrender the wish to hear from Yeong-hye what everything feels like from her perspective. The "big reveal" never comes. But the twist lies in hearing this after all, but in the voice of In-hye, and even before the author has cued me to the deeper significance.

I don't think it matters whether Yeong-hye will live or die - the author has told us that it doesn't matter to her - and thus we never need to know. But death of some sort shades the ending, with the "black bird flying up toward the dark clouds," which has other place where the author positions it if not meant as a symbol.
(less)

flag

View 2 comments

About Goodreads Q&A

Ask and answer questions about books!

You can pose questions to the Goodreads community with Reader Q&A, or ask your favorite author a question with Ask the Author.

See Featured Authors Answering Questions

Learn more