Life
and art, fedora-wearing gangster, the ring of grime around an
unwashed bathtub, parent-echoing behavior, getting the girl and the
money, silent yearning, meeting your long, lost friend on the same
day you win the lottery, art and life… Given this is a post
regarding Donna Tartt’s 2013 The Goldfinch, one may assume
that is a nutshell review. Banish the notion (at least the details);
it is, in fact, mood setting.
The
Goldfinch is the story of two phases in the life of Theodore
Decker: one early teens, the other mid-twenties. An intelligent
young man just going through puberty at the start of the novel, Theo
lives in a small Manhattan apartment with his mother—his alcoholic
father having walked out on the family a year prior. A kind, caring,
cosmopolitan woman, Theo’s mother is the anchor of his life. But
one day she is taken from him, and replaced by a painting of a
goldfinch. (Nothing fantastical; read to learn the details). The
rug of life pulled out from under Theo, his anchor is gone. Left
floating between relatives and family friends in the ensuing turmoil,
Theo is pushed toward a life that will test him physically,
emotionally, and intellectually, and he may not survive, let alone
keep the painting a secret.
If
anything, The Goldfinch is a ripping good read. Anyone who
has read only the first 200 or so pages (and its relatively excessive
detail), would likely, strongly disagree. But once the plot wheels
all start turning, particularly once Theo is forced outside of NYC,
pace picks up and significant events (read: dramatic events) start
happening with greater frequency. The climax of Theo’s journey
exciting and emotional, Tartt keeps the pages turning—at least
those beyond the initial setup, the ride as a whole intense,
absorbing, and interest-filled.
But
The Goldfinch, I think, would have itself be a Literary novel.
The problem, as hinted, is that events start happening with lesser
and lesser probability of likelihood, not to mention the majority of
characters begin occupying increasingly stereotypical (detailed, but
still stereotypical) roles, all of which means the novel’s literary
intentions erode as its bestseller/popular fiction foundation
establishes itself. Theo’s father, for example, exists in the gray
area between caricature and human. The details of his lifestyle are
realized in believable enough fashion, but his dialogue and behavior
too often touch upon cliche. Another clear indication is the plot’s
climax: classic, just classic—having cake and eating it too. I
should be clear that this is only a criticism of the novel’s lack
of chewy matter—of true complementary literary substance—than
anything regarding how readable or enjoyable the story is. I had
trouble to put the book down, just not for burning questions
regarding the relationship of art and life, individuality and
personal development. Despite elements that would seem to speak to
the contrary, gestalt is not achieved.
Accordingly,
The Goldfinch has two endings. The first is the end of Theo’s
story; as mentioned, a rousing and emotionally dense series of scenes
that force him into a turning point in life and keep the reader’s
eyes glued to the page. Truly all well 'n good. But Tartt adds an
additional fifteen or so pages of “thematic denouement” that serve to
badly muddy the waters. Reading like a high schooler’s
journal, it’s difficult to discern the message in the fifteen
pages, let alone balance the content across the preceding events. It
leaves an uncertain taste in the exact moment such a story should leave a salty, airy, sweet, bitter, or bittersweet taste.
Thus, two endings: one which capitalizes magnificently on the plot
threads and characters spun to that point, and the second which takes
the wind out of any cohesive point or idea the novel may have been
sailing toward. (That would be the nutshell review.)
I’m
not sure if it is the closest relative, but my mind kept flashing
back to W. Somerset Maugham’s Of Human Bondage while reading
The Goldfinch. Though Maugham’s protagonist was dealing
with physical as well as psychological problems, the two young men’s
stories nevertheless follow relatively similar arcs. (Their stories
are likewise written in a relatively similar style, i.e. verbose with
little left between the lines.) Tartt’s novel certainly stretches
the boundaries of ‘realism’ more than Maughham’s, nonetheless I
still feel that the messages of each are equally simple. Not
inherently a bad thing, they have a pretentious quality to them that
more compact and discreet bildungsromans like Hermann Hesse’s
Demian or John Steinbeck’s The Red Pony show more than tell.
(Going further, I would say Jonathan Lethem’s The Fortress of Solitude, which possesses a sophistication and underlying
intelligence that Tartt’s novel only occasionally flashes, remains
the best bildungsroman of a young man growing up in NYC in turbulent
circumstances. Read it, too.)
A
mainstream novel wanting to be Literature, The Goldfinch spins
an excellent yarn. Despite a slow start, Theo’s story unravels in
highly entertaining, page-turning fashion. The final fifth of the
novel can’t reveal itself fast enough. It’s the balance of the
novel’s mainstream elements, however, that fail to match the
philosophizing and commentary on the intersection of art and life.
For example, character presentation (at times immature, and mostly
good vs. bad), escalation of events (requires an ever escalating
suspension of disbelief), and maudlin trite in the last few pages
(better left to high school classrooms) doesn’t compare to the
message one believes Tartt is aiming at. It’s clear there were
aspirations for a chewy, profound statement on the nature of humanity
and art which the dime store framework just can’t deliver. Thus
read The Goldfinch for what it is: an imminently readable
story.
No comments:
Post a Comment