21st Century Literature discussion
2015 Book Discussions
>
Euphoria - Chapters 21-31 (March 2015)
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Violet
(new)
Mar 06, 2015 03:36AM
the thread to discuss the final chapters of Euphoria.
reply
|
flag
I’ve got a theory that if you read this novel in big daily instalments you’ll enjoy it more than if you read say ten pages at every sitting. The former way of reading is perhaps to experience the novel as the sum of its parts; the latter, to experience it as more than the sum of its parts because, in a sense, you’re skipping some of those parts in your enthusiasm to read on. I’ve decided to use chapter 21 to highlight how King consistently allows the tension line of this novel to go slack. By this late stage the novel should be reaching some kind of crescendo. Instead the opening page is nothing but idle chitchat. Wholly gratuitous gossip about Stalin and WH Auden. What either of these two are doing in this novel is a mystery. Then Fen has yet another snide dig at Nell. Haven’t we already got the point by now? Seeing as he’s going to express a much more explosive and probably valid complaint later in the book it’s not only gratuitous to have him quibbling again here but undermines the real dramatic moment in this section when he questions Nell’s commitment to her marriage. Then there’s the very long winded reading of Helen’s book, though not before a brief discussion about tea which allows Fen to get in another snide remark. All the stuff about Helen’s book feels forced – researched material shoehorned in without much flair or subtlety. Bankson says, “The most intoxicating drug could not have had a stronger effect on me.” But this is a classic example of telling, not showing. The entire section about Helen’s book is prosaic telling, not showing. Once again all dramatic tension has fizzled out of the novel. King restores it at the end of the chapter – but, for me, so many chapters in the novel follow this somewhat sloppy pattern.
Another point, I would imagine it’s much easier to dramatise characters and a story you yourself have created whereas characters and a story based on real life models are going to demand a kind of objective authenticity and therefore exert more pressure on the writer to be told rather than shown.
I agree, Violet about the tension factor. I feel like this novel is playing hide-and-seek with me. One moment I’m excited with the thrill of the chase, the next the trail has gone cold and my attention has lapsed again. It’s a very uneven novel I’m finding.
I think this is partly due to a failure of imagination on King’s part, or rather, an inability to sustain imaginative intensity. It’s like there are moments when she loses command of her material and makes do with generic chitchat or description which has no dramatic purpose in the book. It’s an ambitious novel so I’m not denigrating her gifts as a writer but maybe it needed another draft to tighten it up and heighten its focus?
I agree, Violet, 100% with everything you've said.I feel completely ripped off. Every bit of dramatic juiciness was conducted offstage!
The worst case of telling not showing EVER!
I disagree. I felt a great balance between tension and reflection. Everything to do with Helen's book felt exciting, like I shared their exhilaration.I also feel that the choices she makes were deliberate rather than any loss of control on her part. I don't think she's trying to make the tension and drama sustained and taut every moment. I think she's showing the story, as Bankson sees it. Obviously the tense moments and scenes are part of that, but so are the moments inbetween. To me, it builds up a picture specifically of how he experienced Nell, experienced the episode. As a reflection on it all from the point in the future he's writing, pretty much all of his choices (which of course King makes, but she's choosing what he would choose because it's him telling the story) make perfect sense to me.
The whole tell/show thing is a very broad rule, in my opinion. When you find writers who are just plain bad at their craft, the quickest and easiest fix is to tell less and show more, but those who are masters of it can use either to great effect. Traveler of the Century, which we read last month, did a lot of telling, and was an outstanding example of a writer at the peak of his craft, for me.
Mod
I did like the sections where Fen, Nell, and Bankson took turns reading Helen's book. The drama and tension of the love triangle sort of drifted away for a little while. It was one of the few times where I almost understood why Nell would want to have Fen in her life - another time being when Nell observed how upset Fen became over Bankson's illness. It was interesting to see how the one thing that really brought them all together led to the chart/graph, which wound up becoming a huge burden to Bankson.
Another question. Nell's journal? Is it necessary? I can easily imagine this novel without it. After all King chooses to shroud Nell in mystery to a large extent. The violence she suffers from Fen only ever hinted at. At times the journal can also seem like a kind of recycle bin for King's research. She can't find anywhere else to insert it so she sticks it in the journal. Might this novel have been better told entirely from Bankson's perspective? I'm not saying it would. Just curious because no one seems to have mentioned the journal at all, as if it's hardly there. She uses it to tell us about Xambun and she uses it to introduce some of the tribe's characters but it wouldn't have been difficult to impart this information through Bankson. Why is the journal necessary?
I think it would be hard to tell the story so well aithout it because Bankson wasn't there for so many key events. She gets away with starting the novel based on suppositions or piecing-together Bankson makes and retells, but I don't think it would have held all the way through; I think there are things we need to know as the reader that he just couldn't have told us. I also think it forms a very crucial part of framing the novel as the much-later memoirs of Bankson. I get this impression from an early stage and am often reminded of it, which to me adds a certain flavour I very much enjoyed. She didn't try to make us forget who was telling it and when, rather she went out of her way to infuse the writing with the knowledge that this was a later reflection, and the diary is part of this.
I'm with Terry - I thought the structure was creative and worked well. The use of the journals allowed us to know what Nell was thinking and allowed us to see things through her eyes as well as Bankson's. Fen is the odd man out in that we do not have any direct input from him, but then he wasn't taking any notes. The more I think about the structure the more it works.
