Since this book finally arrived in the mail, I was able to finish it this weekend. So here are my notes on the rest of the short stories in Karen Russell's Vampires in the Lemon Grove. Go here for the first couple stories.
The Seagull Army Descends on Strong Beach, 1979
In this story, I kept waiting for Nal to turn into a seagull, but it didn't happen. The first time I read it, when I was missing parts and only reading the bits I could find online, I thought I must have missed some crucial parts. It felt like something was missing. When I got to read the whole thing, I found out I hadn't missed out on too much. So I still feel like something is missing from this story.
What Makes This Story Work?
Aside from the fact that, for me, it doesn't? Maybe it works because it answers the universal question, "What if?" I feel like that question is the keystone of this story. The seagulls personify possibility that doesn't happen. Since at some point, everyone asks this question, I suppose that is how Russell is trying to connect with her reader.
Now Talk About the Writing, Elizabeth.
This story uses a lot of what one of my English professors calls "insignificant significant detail." The idea is to include details that do not matter to the story, but that help make it more concrete and believable. While it doesn't matter what items the seagulls collect, for instance, Russell includes concrete items in the story -- disconnected retainer wires, for instance. This concrete detail gives an unquestionable reality to what is, providing a subtle foil to all the possibility stuff happening in the plot. Russell always uses concrete detail, but this is more obvious and blatant than usual, so it clearly was no accident.
Proving Up
First off (SPOILER ALERT), I think he died midway through the story, in the blizzard. Everything gets surreal after that and he doesn't mention pain or cold. So there you go. (IF YOU AVOIDED THOSE SENTENCES BECAUSE OF THE SPOILER, YOU CAN LOOK BACK NOW) As for this story being about a crisis of faith, as my classmates asserted ... I can see that angle, but I'm not buying it, because I don't think the conclusion contributes fuel to it. I feel like it's a story about the "why" of motivation, which has some tie-ins with hope. The mother has lost hope, the father is blind to the possibility that there's been no purpose to his suffering (maybe a better way to say this is it's a story about purpose?), the dead sisters are a reminder of sacrifice in the name of success and purpose, and that crazed farmer only cares about his purpose and reaching it. The Window, then, symbolizes the success they are striving toward. It is in their grasp, but it just isn't in place yet.What Makes This Story Work?
Creepy + Old West + Clear objective that leads the reader through (we are lead through just like the narrator himself -- again with the reader being in sync with the main character) = It Works. It uses the old and charges it with something new, which is always a good idea (unless the new is stupid). It gives the reader something to stand on, lets them get their bearings, then pulls that foundation out from under their feet, throwing them off-balance and making them admit, "That was cool."
Now Talk About the Writing, Elizabeth.
This story has a better sense of place than her others, but I'm still not feeling it. I did not wonder where my jacket was, for instance, when the blizzard hit. I also did not care about the characters or the plight they were in. Maybe if I'd had experience similar to theirs, it would be different; but how likely is it for someone to have been in any similar situation these days? Not one of Russell's better stories. I don't even feel like talking about the writing it just wasn't splendid.
The Barn At the End of Our Term
The thing I'm learning about Karen Russell is she loves symbolism and puts it into her stories without much camouflage. She is clearly trying to teach something with every short story. In this one, it's about accepting reality with humility and grace. In my opinion, anyway.
Also, as my professor says, "I bet this is funny, but I'm too dumb!" I'm sure there are a lot of jokes in this story any American presidential history buff would find to be hilarious that I don't even recognize as a joke.What Makes This Story Work?
Cultural familiarity with the characters helps a lot. It gives a strange story a solid foundation. We are also on the same page as the characters, which is, as I've said, characteristic of Russell. They don't know why this is going on, we don't know why this is going on. It's another transformation story, which the other stories have prepared the reader for. The sequence helps, though it is not necessary for understanding the stories -- after all, most of these were originally published elsewhere before being included in this collection. The placement of this story is nice because it is a break after the darkness of Proving Up.
Now Talk About the Writing, Elizabeth.
Third-person, free-indirect. She only uses details that further her plot and add some push. I feel like they are in a generic farm, though, which I don't like. Russell does not linger in this story; it makes me think it was probably not her favorite to write.
Dougbert Shackleton's Rules for Antarctic Tailgating
Honestly, I think Russell wrote this because she thought it was a fun idea. Maybe she was teasing sports fans. This could be read more seriously, as the narrative of someone dealing with divorce, but there is scarce evidence for that reading, so I"m going with the hyperbolic-sports-fan reading -- i.e., the obvious interpretation.
What Makes This Story Work?
It's taking something we are all familiar with and placing it in a different environment. Usually, the new is placed in a familiar environment or the familiar in a new, but rarely is that "new" also bizarre. In here, it's bizarre. Somehow, Russell's style makes that a positive thing that really makes this story a stand-out from other sports-themed stories.
Now Talk About the Writing, Elizabeth.The format for this story is different, given as a list of explanations instead of a linear story. I've experimented with story arcs before, but it has yet to work this well. I think it's because Russell isn't focused on a story, just on explaining a situation. From where I'm standing, that is unique. Also: This is the first story in this collection that speaks directly to the reader. This helps it seem less like a story, too, I think. It is closer to a long blog post than a story. Reading it is not awkward, so that means all this format stuff works.
The New Veterans
What amazed me most about this story was how Beverly was so willing to collect harm to herself in order to help Derek. I think, though, after some reflection just now, that it is a story that highlights how caregivers also suffer from negative side effects via whatever the cared-for person is going through or went through. IN that sense, this is a realistic story. A desire to adopt the pain of others so they won't have to suffer is not unique to this fictional story. I'm glad this side of PTSD is being told. This is, to me, her most powerful story. With these stories, though, it's probably whatever we can relate best to that we see as being most powerful. That is the real beauty of this collection.
What Makes This Story Work?
I feel like this story takes what a lot of people feel and gives it physical representation, but it also gives a warning at the end, in a gentle way, as a suggestion: Is it right to carry others' burdens? What about after they have set them aside and moved on? See above.
Now Talk About the Writing, Elizabeth.
The concrete detail is there again and, as with all these stories, it is clear Russell did her research. The facts aren't included to show off; they are precisely placed to make us believe the narrator is a good masseuse and the vet really is a vet who served in Iraq. The story does not pretend to be anything but fiction (a courtesy to real vets?), but I can suspend enough belief to see the truth (or truth-questing) beneath the fiction. I do hope that makes sense.
The Graveless Doll of Eric Mutis
When this story started, my automatic reaction was something along the lines of, "Oh no." I did not want to read a story about kids being turned into scarecrows then hung in trees in a creepy park. Luckily, that wasn't the story.
What Makes This Story Work?
By this point, the reader is prepared for the darkly bizarre. This story taps into childhood -- from the bully's point of view, which is not common. If you know the city, the place (well done in this piece) gives it an air of the disturbing familiar. If not, the scarecrow will. So Russell has played to audiences from both rural and urban backgrounds. The use of a pet also brought the story close to home for a lot of readers. It kind of felt like she was pulling all the stops: If nothing has hit home so far, Russell wants this story to (last-ditch effort?).
Now Talk About the Writing, Elizabeth.
As always, Russell's writing was rich in detail. Also characteristic of her, those details were not aimed to paint a picture, but to create a mood. I was creeped out, and so was the character. The cursing took me a little off-guard, since there was so much more of it in this piece, but it did fit the characters and place (doesn't mean I liked it, but I'll grant her that much). Her writing is rich with adjectives and adverbs -- "We stood on the dirty tarmac of the sidewalk, bathed in a deep-sea light. Even on a nonscarecrow day I dreaded this, the summative pressure of the good-bye moment." Definitely not minimalist; approaching maximalism while not making the narrator sound too old (probably helped by modern, coarse vocabulary). Still, his vocab use shows he's grown up because of the experience; since it is told in the past tense, we assume he's looking back and telling the story.
No comments:
Post a Comment