Love your explanation of cooked vs raw; that vividly describes the difference between in-own-voice narratives and the more carefully managed narrative when filtered through the consciousness of some narrative entity.
Also, I made myself a post-it note with your comment about great sentences having, just like a book, a beginning/middle/end--look for the dance of inviting/withholding/unfolding. (And then later today I wrote a sentence unconsciously (insidiously?) inspired by that vision of dancing.) Thanks, David!
David would you count Lawrence Durell's Alexandria Quartet as a polyvocal work even though there are 4 novels? I very much enjoy reading these lists, Lots of good reads. Thank you.
That's a good question. I actually wrote a chunk of the posts about it, but cut it. I'm going to say that for the purpose of this investigation I'm going to rule out Trilogies, Quartets, and the like. But one aspect of having multiple points of view in a single work is that--at least sometimes--a voice that comes later in the sequence will contradict an earlier one . . . actually, "contradict" is only one of the possible relationships between the voices--a later one can "add weight to," or "fine-tune," or "disclose a piece of story that the earlier voice chose to omit," and so on.
Here's what I was going to say about The AQ: at the end of JUSTINE, Darly and his deceased girlfriend's daughter leave Alexandria for an island. At the start of Book Two, BALTHAZAR, a boat approaches the island: it's the character Balthazar, returning the manuscript of JUSTINE (i.e., the book we've just read); he tells Darly that the he got part of it right, but, being an outsider, he could only know so much of the truth of things. Thus, the novel BALTHAZAR is JUSTINE again, with the hidden parts revealed. Or that's how I remember it. It's been a long time since I read it, but I think that's the basic idea. [Then, with MOUNTOLIVE, the POV changes to third-person, more omniscient, and you get the story of the British diplomat.] Darly returns in CLEA, about the artist.]
Anyway, thanks for responding. Hoping things are good on your end.
I'd add Killing Mr. Watson, by Peter Mathiessen to your list. I read it over 20 years ago, so the details are not fresh to mind, but I liked the way the story, never fully clear, is told by multiple characters, and the truth is not knowable.
I'm currently wading through one of those island novels, The Hakawati, by Rabih Alammedine. For the first half of it's 520 pages I found it to be an inventive, entertaining fractal kaleidoscope of different timelines and narratives with different narrators, who break into telling (or recounting in memory) folk fables and biblical legends and fantasy stories, whose protagonists also tell stories, whose characters tell stories, etc. The book title means "the storyteller". But with another 150 pages to go, it feels less like a kaleidoscope and more like watching colorful laundry spin through the washing machine glass. None of the narratives or even the characters stays in focus long enough to grab onto. It's a book and a concept I admire far more than I actually enjoy.
Yeah, that's an issue--admiring vs. enjoying. Maybe you've given me a future post here. Did you read I, the Divine? I thought that one was good, also An Unnecessary Woman. He's inventive, anyway. I'll keep checking his work out. And there's the fact that some books go on too long. This is a thought one has when on a Trollope jag. Those guys were great at building up, but not so interested in cutting back. Trollope is easy reading and many of the stories are engaging, but I find myself thinking, sometimes, I just don't have time for another one . . . But this question of admiration vs. actual enjoyment is worth thinking about . . . Thanks, as always, for your thoughts.
I did read I, the Devine, after seeing it mentioned in this worthy Substack. I was impressed enough to pick up The Hakawati.
On that topic, I encourage you to do a post about books you admire enough to consider them worthy literature, but didn't actually enjoy the experience of reading them (as opposed to allegedly great books you're supposed to like, but didn't in any way). Then ask people to share their lists. Could be very cathartic to make such confessions.
Love your explanation of cooked vs raw; that vividly describes the difference between in-own-voice narratives and the more carefully managed narrative when filtered through the consciousness of some narrative entity.
Also, I made myself a post-it note with your comment about great sentences having, just like a book, a beginning/middle/end--look for the dance of inviting/withholding/unfolding. (And then later today I wrote a sentence unconsciously (insidiously?) inspired by that vision of dancing.) Thanks, David!
I am just now starting Let the Great World Spin. I put it on my TBR list because of a recommendation in one of your earlier posts.
I'm thinking it's time for a re-read. Thanks for completing the loop! I'm sure you'll like it.
David would you count Lawrence Durell's Alexandria Quartet as a polyvocal work even though there are 4 novels? I very much enjoy reading these lists, Lots of good reads. Thank you.
That's a good question. I actually wrote a chunk of the posts about it, but cut it. I'm going to say that for the purpose of this investigation I'm going to rule out Trilogies, Quartets, and the like. But one aspect of having multiple points of view in a single work is that--at least sometimes--a voice that comes later in the sequence will contradict an earlier one . . . actually, "contradict" is only one of the possible relationships between the voices--a later one can "add weight to," or "fine-tune," or "disclose a piece of story that the earlier voice chose to omit," and so on.
Here's what I was going to say about The AQ: at the end of JUSTINE, Darly and his deceased girlfriend's daughter leave Alexandria for an island. At the start of Book Two, BALTHAZAR, a boat approaches the island: it's the character Balthazar, returning the manuscript of JUSTINE (i.e., the book we've just read); he tells Darly that the he got part of it right, but, being an outsider, he could only know so much of the truth of things. Thus, the novel BALTHAZAR is JUSTINE again, with the hidden parts revealed. Or that's how I remember it. It's been a long time since I read it, but I think that's the basic idea. [Then, with MOUNTOLIVE, the POV changes to third-person, more omniscient, and you get the story of the British diplomat.] Darly returns in CLEA, about the artist.]
Anyway, thanks for responding. Hoping things are good on your end.
I'd add Killing Mr. Watson, by Peter Mathiessen to your list. I read it over 20 years ago, so the details are not fresh to mind, but I liked the way the story, never fully clear, is told by multiple characters, and the truth is not knowable.
Thanks, Bill. I'm storing up some adds and updates and so on, for a future post. Thanks for reading and responding!
" As I Lay Dying (1930)¹ was where I became a Faulkner devotee." Yes, me too. You offer a great list.
I'm currently wading through one of those island novels, The Hakawati, by Rabih Alammedine. For the first half of it's 520 pages I found it to be an inventive, entertaining fractal kaleidoscope of different timelines and narratives with different narrators, who break into telling (or recounting in memory) folk fables and biblical legends and fantasy stories, whose protagonists also tell stories, whose characters tell stories, etc. The book title means "the storyteller". But with another 150 pages to go, it feels less like a kaleidoscope and more like watching colorful laundry spin through the washing machine glass. None of the narratives or even the characters stays in focus long enough to grab onto. It's a book and a concept I admire far more than I actually enjoy.
Yeah, that's an issue--admiring vs. enjoying. Maybe you've given me a future post here. Did you read I, the Divine? I thought that one was good, also An Unnecessary Woman. He's inventive, anyway. I'll keep checking his work out. And there's the fact that some books go on too long. This is a thought one has when on a Trollope jag. Those guys were great at building up, but not so interested in cutting back. Trollope is easy reading and many of the stories are engaging, but I find myself thinking, sometimes, I just don't have time for another one . . . But this question of admiration vs. actual enjoyment is worth thinking about . . . Thanks, as always, for your thoughts.
I did read I, the Devine, after seeing it mentioned in this worthy Substack. I was impressed enough to pick up The Hakawati.
On that topic, I encourage you to do a post about books you admire enough to consider them worthy literature, but didn't actually enjoy the experience of reading them (as opposed to allegedly great books you're supposed to like, but didn't in any way). Then ask people to share their lists. Could be very cathartic to make such confessions.
Also, just today I decided to dedicate a post to books I didn't finish, and why . . .