The New Weird discussion

This topic is about
Magic for Beginners
Jul-Aug 2015 Group Read
date
newest »


I read the first story, "The Faery Handbag" and liked it! It's not great literature. You won't find me gushing in praise for the writing itself. Kelly Link is no Angela Carter. Her command of craft and word choice is not consummate. Nevertheless, the first story is just a solid introductory story to a promising collection. There is a word flourish every once in a while, just when you think Link doesn't have it in her, and I appreciate that. It keeps this reader intrigued and on his toes.
When I finished the story, I wondered at first is this really "New Weird"? There's nothing all that horrifying going on. In fact, the story strongly resembles a typical fantasy story. Just as in so many fantasy stories, a main feature of this one is the transition from this world into the fantastic world where the rules change. How this transition gets made is an aspect of their story fantasy writers give much thought. In C. S. Lewis's Narnia series, for example, the transition point is the wardrobe. For Harry Potter it's the train from station nine and a half. The transition gate really helps set the tone.
Kelly Link does something very interesting with the transition gate in this first story. She makes it the entire story! This is weird, really weird, even . . . dare I say it? . . . new weird. What happens after the transition is of no consequence. We aren't even informed of what takes place in the other world the minor characters go to, only that time runs differently, just as you would expect it to.
This is a transition as story. What a concept! How can a story be about only the transition? The transition as described by Link is not in the least exceptional, though the handbag as gate is original. The rather generic characters of the story treat it as something fairly commonplace to the extent they think of it at all. How can a story about an unexceptional transition gate sustain a reader's interest? If you're curious, read the story and give me your take. Does a story about the process and not the result work for you as well?

If you are a person who reads stories and likes characters to have clear motivations, likes plots in which protagonists are trying to overcome obstacles for a meaningful reason, obstacles set up by antagonists who operate from their own explicit motivations, then Kelly Link's stories are not for you. I prefer stories of the kind just described. They are part of my expectations when I read a story. If I give those expectations up to read a Kelly Link story, I don't enjoy myself. Therefore, I stopped reading Link's book after page 70 or so when it became clear to me these the only kinds of story Kelly Link tells are ones where mood, atmosphere, and character mean more than plot, climax, or thematic point. I can't appreciate Kelly Link's work.
If this book interests you as well, please feel free to share your observations here as you start to read it. I propose a ground rule for our group reads. Since they are going to be bi-monthly (for now), let's agree that posts made in the first month (July) can not contain spoilers. However, posts made the second month (August) can contain spoilers. Therefore, if you have not read the book by August 1, and want to avoid spoilers, don't look at comments in this topic starting August 1.
Cool! Who else is looking forward to reading this book? What do you think of the cover?