Searching for Obscenity

Google AnalyticsWho Searches for Obscenities?

In a post two weeks ago, I described sanitizing a manuscript, turning “shit” into “crap” and “assholes” into “scumbags.” (See http://billadamsphd.net/2015/04/16/changing-happy-to-glad/).

To my surprise the hit rate on my site jumped from 10 a day to nearly 200 a day, then dropped back a bit, but still stayed near 100 for about 10 days.

Why?

Hordes more people were finding my site, presumably because of the obscenities in that post. But who were these people?  Who types “asshole” into a search engine? Were they looking for porn?  Sorry to disappoint.

I also noticed that my bounce rate dropped, from about 98% to 79%.  When visitors come in on a particular post or page, then leave without clicking anything, that’s considered a “bounce” in the jargon of Google Analytics. That visitor bounced off of the site, did not stick. So you do not want a high bounce rate. You want visitors to click stuff and look around.

My bounce rate dropped by 10 percent because some of the visitors attracted by obscenity clicked something else; they didn’t bounce off right away. Maybe they thought the porn was hidden somewhere nearby?  That’s hard to believe.

It remains a mystery, who visits this site, and why. But I did learn that to increase traffic, all I have to do us use bad language more often, dammit!

Financial Crime!

AMW Logo

 

May 9th, 2015 meeting – Financial Crimes AND the Writer-Editor Relationship

I’ll be there for the monthly Arizona Mystery Writers meeting, because it’s interesting, and because I’m the emcee.

A representative from the TPD Financial Crimes Unit walks the audience through the investigation process, from the crime’s commission through post-conviction. Good detail for writing your next story.

After lunch,  a group from the local Editorial Freelancers Association talks about “How to Get the Most Out of the Writer-Editor Relationship.”

The meeting is at Old Pueblo Grille in Tucson, 10am – 1:30 pm. Admission includes lunch.  Details at www.meetup.com/Arizona-Mystery-Writers-of-Tucson/events/221926130/.

 

 

 

O’Brien – The Third Policeman

thethirdpoliceman-158x244A Fine Pancake, It Is

O’Brien, Flann. (1967) The Third Policeman. Champaigne, Ill.: Dalkey Archive (209pp)

This strange tale is strongly reminiscent of Alice in Wonderland.  An unnamed narrator in 19th century Ireland tells his first-person story of stumbling into another world where fantasy prevails over reason and physics. He finds himself in the company of two policemen who are obsessed with bicycles (and preventing their theft) and concerned above all with maintaining the correct operating environment of an underground lair called “eternity,” where anything one desires can be magically produced from a sequence of electro-mechanical storage boxes.  The policemen take our hapless narrator down the hole and he requests gold and diamonds, which are duly produced for him. Alas, the rule is, nothing can be taken back up the elevator, so his riches are useless.

Back from eternity, a commissioner reports that a bicycle has been stolen and demands that something be done. The two policemen announce that the narrator is the thief and that they have already caught him. This satisfies the commissioner, but the narrator now must be hanged for his alleged crime. Fortunately he is saved in the nick of time by an army of one-legged men who tie themselves together in pairs, their good legs on the outside, so that they can run as well as any able-bodied man.  And on and on. There is no actual plot. The mysterious third policeman does appear in the end, to no important consequence. The characters are loony-toons, so the enjoyment of the book arises from its wonderfully strange language and its delightful fabrications.

Some of my favorite examples of the latter include the explanation of why the earth must be shaped like a sausage.  Most people believe there are four directions, north, south, east and west. But a demonstrable fact is that if you travel east for a long enough time, you end up back where you started. Therefore distinguishing east and west as separate directions is spurious, as only one of them is genuine. Similarly for north and south, leaving only two genuine directions.  The explanation continues in similar shaggy logic until it is “proved” that the earth must be sausage-shaped.

Another favorite was a knife that could prick your skin and draw blood when it was several inches away from you.  That’s because it had been sharpened to such a fine point that the last few inches of it were entirely invisible to the human eye.

Another riff exploits Zeno’s paradox to “explain” why  movement through space is merely an hallucination, not really possible. Another explains that when light waves are stretched out longer and longer, they eventually become sound waves. The two policemen therefore spend the summer collecting sounds and putting them in a box, so that in the winter they can be compressed and turned back into much-needed light.

Some of the wonderful descriptions and dialogs include:

“We were in an entirely other field by this time and in the company of white-coloured brown-coloured cows. They watched us quietly as we made a path between them and changed their attitudes slowly as if to show us all of the maps on their fat sides. “

The high saddle was the father of the low handlebars. It crucifies the fork and gives you a blood rush in the head, it is very sore on the internal organs.’
‘Which of the organs?’ I inquired.
‘Both of them,’ said the Sergeant.”

“When are you going to hang me,” I asked…

“Tomorrow morning, if we have the scaffold up in time, and unless it is raining. You would not believe how slippery the rain can make a new scaffold. You could slip and break your neck…”

 

“A map!” I cried excitedly…

“You will agree, he said, that it is a fascinating pancake and a conundrum of great incontinence, a phenomenon of the first rarity.”

 

Is there any point to this romp through wit and language? Being generous, one could say there is an implicit moral through-line to the effect that if one is evil when alive, one will be eternally perplexed when dead. That’s not much of a thesis, so I’d say instead that the book has no deeper meaning than the words on the page, and one should just enjoy it as a playful  compendium of tall tales.

Changing Happy to Glad

Swearing1What’s in a Word?

When I was in the corporate world, I  would release planning and budget documents to committees for review and every person would make revisions, just to show that they could, and the whole document would have to be rewritten and the cycle repeated.  After a while I learned to put in a few highly questionable paragraphs with outlier ideas, bait for these compulsive committee members, who would, as predicted, gleefully strike them out, providing detailed explanations of the wisdom of doing so. I would end up with exactly the document I wanted.

I came to think of that process as “Changing ‘happy’ to ‘glad.’”  If somebody went through my document and changed every occurrence of the word, “happy” to the word, “glad,” what did I care? It meant nothing. Despite committee-members’ self-important editing, the changes were cosmetic.

Recently, I had a similar experience in fiction. A potential publisher emphasized in their submission guidelines that they did not want to see obscenities in manuscripts.  This presented a problem for my story of a tough, hard-drinking, foul-mouthed big city cop. But I thought, they’re just words, I’ll change them and see.

So I used global find and replace to change “shit” to “crap,” on the assumption that “crap” was not too obscene. “Fuck-ups” became “screw-ups” and “assholes” became “scumbags.”   Actually I first changed “asshole” to “jerk,” because an asshole is somebody who abuses social felicity for selfish reasons. An asshole is not making an innocent social mistake, no, it’s someone who aggressively disrespects the social other for self-aggrandizement. I thought “jerk” captured that meaning fairly closely, and I made that change, but later realized that “scumbag” had the better rhythm and was close enough, even though I’m not even sure what a scumbag is. So I changed all jerks into scumbags.

I let “damn” and “hell” fly, thinking they were not technically obscene anymore, but I deleted all “Goddamn.”

Then I read through the whole manuscript, to see what I’d missed and if the changes had robbed my cop of his voice. I found a lot of small errors that needed fixing anyway, which was good, but I was surprised to notice that the sanitization of the language made essentially no difference to the character or the story. When I first wrote it with all the obscene language, I thought it was crucial to the character’s voice to talk with a foul mouth. That’s what a tough urban cop would do. But it wasn’t true.

 

Quinn shook his head in disgust. Rich assholes, think they’re entitled to everything.

Quinn shook his head in disgust. Rich scumbags, think they’re entitled to everything.

 

She thinks she’s special, but she’s just an asshole. All criminals are assholes. They know what they’re doing is wrong, but they do it anyway. Cops are supposed to stand up to that bullshit, not let it slide by.

She thinks she’s special, but she’s just a scumbag. All criminals are scumbags. They know what they’re doing is wrong, but they do it anyway. Cops are supposed to stand up to that crap, not let it slide by.

 

I learned that if the character’s voice is true and consistent, 99% of the vehemence comes through without using the obscenities.

 

“They’re just a government bureaucracy, like TPD. They fuck up, like we do. They’re not magic, despite what they think.”

“They’re just a government bureaucracy, like TPD. They screw up, like we do. They’re not magic, despite what they think.”

 

So in a perverse way, changing shit to crap is very similar to changing happy to glad. The changes did introduce a few problems. You write “an asshole” but “a scumbag,” not “an scumbag.” It was hard to catch all those. There were several cases where I had created a problem by going from asshole to jerk to scumbag:

“He jerked the wheel sharply to the left.”

“He scumbaged the wheel sharply to the left.”

 

And I didn’t know what to do with the common infix, “un-fucking-believable,” which became “un-screwing-believable,” so I just went with “unbelievable,” and there was no real loss in the character’s expression or intent.

It was a good lesson. I don’t usually swear, but I’m not comfortable writing in sanitized language when I imagine my character swears like a sailor (or a tough cop). But from this exercise I’ve learned I can always go back and clean it up with only a small loss of affect and effect. Why offend some readers when I can make them either happy or glad?

 

Corbett – The Art of Character

Art of Character 200_Art and Craft

Corbett, David (2013). The Art of Character: Creating Memorable Characters for Fiction Film, and TV. New York: Penguin. 383 pp.

This widely praised book is definitely worth reading, especially the first 120 pages, and the last 65, which are packed with insights. In the middle, the book degenerates into long, annotated lists without much analysis.

For example, Corbett cites The Art of Dramatic Writing, by Lajos Egri, which itemizes how to construct a character in terms of physical appearance, psychological traits, and sociological factors. Corbett spends the next 80 pages going over Egri’s list in detail that adds little to understanding. (Is your character comfortable with sex? Does your character have a good fashion sense? What are your character’s favorite foods? Does your character have strong political beliefs?). The point of this drawn-out exercise is to expand the range of choices you might consider when crafting a character, a worthy consideration, but one that’s swamped by tedious examples from books, TV, and movies. Do we really need to be reminded that James Joyce took seriously the religion of his characters?

Part III is another long list, this time of all the possible roles a character can take, such as protagonist, antagonist, the steadfast character, the sleepwalker, the ghost, the betrayer and other Joseph Campbell-y reductionistic stereotypes. There many other similar lists out there, about equally informative (e.g., Story Structure Architect, by V.L. Schmidt.)

So let’s look at the “good” 185 pages of the book, at the beginning and at the end. In the beginning section, Corbett starts with the classical, Aristotelian character arc but comes to a startling conclusion. Revelation of the character’s hidden weakness or Achilles’ Heel, does not result in epiphany, as Aristotle suggested, but in shame. This was a huge insight for me, and I realized that the whole notion of the epiphany is an intellectual artifice. Shame is a much more likely reaction. The character must then find a way to believe in his/her self-worth again to overcome that shame, or at least deal with it, as it’s not clear that shame can ever be undone.

Corbett’s discussion of secrets is likewise insightful. All characters have secrets, even secondary characters, and that’s a good way to animate a character and drive a story. Secrets produce contradictions: a hugely useful insight. The use of contradictory traits in the same character is an old trick, hard to do, but Corbett makes it seem reasonable and interesting with his examples (love v. duty, addiction v. propriety, poverty v. pretension, sex v. everything, etc.) He offers a fascinating analysis of forgiveness: is it really possible? What motivates it? Is it always only partial or limited, or qualified? I would have liked a lot more of that discussion.

The last section of the book is similarly filled with useful insight on how to write good scenes. One provocative challenge is to strip a scene down to pure exterior appearances and actions, yet still show, by implication, characters’ interiority. The tension between interior and exterior can be a powerful scene driver.

The section on “voice,” both the narrator’s and the character’s (often they are different) was disappointing, but perhaps there is nothing to say about voice. Everybody wants it but nobody can say what it is or how to get it. The section on dialog was only cursory, but there was a useful list of nuts-and-bolts craft techniques.

The exercises at the end of each chapter seemed formulaic, not well thought-out, but I imagine if you actually did them (I didn’t), they’d be helpful. The lessons of the book apply equally well to fiction, TV and movies, as the subtitle suggests, but aside from a brief and dubious discussion of the camera as narrator in visual storytelling, the book is not customized for screenwriting.

Overall, I’d say this book has useful reminders about what’s possible in developing character, something that prevents you from falling into a rut, and is spiced by a healthy dose of genuine insight into character development, and it all adds up to a compendium of information on the art of character that is well worth having.

Antrim – The Hundred Brothers

Hundred BrothersPostmodern Nihilism

Antrim, Donald (1997). The Hundred Brothers. New York: Picador, 188 pp.

Ninety-nine brothers convene at their dead father’s estate to find his ashes and bury him (one brother couldn’t make it). They meet in a vast library that seems to contain all the knowledge of western civilization. The tale is told by Doug, the family genealogist. He describes 99 quirky personalities who tease and abuse each other, the way many brothers do. Drinks are served; dinner is served, but the brothers never do find the ashes, because quarreling, then fighting degenerate into chaos at an exponential rate, until in the end, everything is destroyed, including the library.

The book is famous for its first sentence, running two and a half pages, in which all 100 brothers are named and described. Also notable, the book has no chapter breaks.  Scenes come into focus as Doug the narrator moves about the library, encountering this brother then that one, but the whole book is one chapter.

The writing is engaging but the problem for me is that it wasn’t about anything.  People and things and situations are described and evaluated and Doug’s ironic and self-effacing tone is supposed to be humorous, but it runs into the problem any first-person narrator faces: nobody is really interesting enough to hold a reader’s attention for a whole novel, not even Humbert Humbert, so the author better have something else up his sleeve, and usually it’s the plot. But this novel has no plot.

Things happen, arbitrarily, haphazardly, randomly. An old brother falls asleep; a blind one falls down; a vase is broken; the lights go out; bats fly from the chimney; the Doberman barks; snow blows in the windows; the ceiling leaks; there’s not enough to eat or drink. Many of these events are supposed to be humorous, but they struck me as implausible and farcical. Even the narrator’s emotions don’t track any logic. At one moment he is seized by panic; the next by maudlin sentimentality;  and in the next, he has to pee. This story lacks causal connective tissue, so technically, it’s a report, or a description, not a story at all.

Any novel can be saved by highly compelling language, even if little else is going on.  Lolita is a good example of that. But Antrim’s language, while engaging, and often amusing, is not lyrical or exceptional. What about strong characters then? A hundred of them to choose from here.  A selection of the brothers is described in eccentric caricatures. These are supposed to be funny, and some are clever, but none reveal much about character.  The set never changes – the whole novel takes place in the library, and the time hardly varies – few flashbacks or reminiscences.  So add it all up and what do you have?  Some madcap entertainment and writing for the sake of writing.

There is, however, an undercurrent of deep mythical and symbolic movement that emerges powerfully at the very end, and in retrospect, one can see how it was set up from the beginning. The destruction of the library represents postmodern nihilism, and the ritual ceremony at the end does the same, with a fantastic blend of imagery from ancient Mayan sacrifices and the Cruxifiction. The barking Doberman stands for the mindless pandemonium of modern life, and Doug’s delusional visions of his father are a yearning for a time of meaning long lost. And much more. Ultimately the thesis is a protest, or at least a wail, against postmodernism and a longing for the innocent beliefs of modernism when things seemed to mean something, as they did in childhood.

So the thematic element of the book is its strong point, all the more so since that element is presented indirectly, in a postmodern fashion (!) and must be inferred by the reader after the fact.  This is a neat trick and an artistic accomplishment that makes wading through the novel very worthwhile. This is a book best enjoyed on the second read, after you realize what the subterranean message is, but in order to get a satisfying second read, you must endure a grating first read. Is it worth it? Definitely. It’s a brilliant work of art.

Signing and Selling Books

TFOBI’ll be signing and selling two of my books this weekend at the Tucson Festival of Books. I volunteered anyway to staff the booth of the Arizona Mystery Writers (www.arizonamysterywriters.com) for a couple of hours, and one benefit of membership is that you can flog your wares while there. So flog I will.

I’ll be showing, maybe selling, maybe signing, Hunter and Hunted, a novella (51,000 words) about art fraud and archery, featuring a female protagonist.  It’s a self-pulbished book that I printed up at CreateSpace. That one goes for $6.99.

The other is my first full-length novel, It Wasn’t Me (a whopping 369 pages), about a woman with a split personality who seeks revenge on an evil uncle. Oh yeah, and she also hates genetically engineered food, and that sub-theme really does tie in to the main story, believe it or not. Also self-published at CreateSpace. Snap it up for a paltry  $9.99.

Click Here to link to bibliographic and ordering information and to see the pretty covers I designed myself.

I’m only taking 7 copies of each title with me to the fair, my entire inventory, but if I sell them, I’ll be surprised and happy. After paying for my City of Tucson business license and the state and city sales taxes (included in the prices!), I’ll be lucky to break even. What the customers will never know is that I would gladly pay THEM a couple of bucks to take a book and read it and enjoy it!

Ah, the glamorous life of a writer…

 

Niffenegger – The Time Traveler’s Wife

Time Travelers WifeProof that Sentimental Claptrap Sells

Audrey Niffenegger (2003). The Time Traveler’s Wife. 534 pp.

I bought this book on a whim, succumbing to marketing hype, and because I do enjoy time travel stories. But it was a huge disappointment.

It’s basically a love story, where the guy, Henry, just happens to be an involuntary time-traveler, unpredictably disappearing into his past or future at any moment. That sounds like a decent premise for an interesting story. The problem is that the time-travel theme is logically inconsistent to the point of nonsense — nothing to learn from it — and the romance is flat and maudlin. Add them up and you got nothin’.

I can imagine a romantic story where childhood sweethearts grow up together, get married, have a kid, face tragedy, then one or both of them dies. The story of life, hey?  As a complication, you can imagine that the husband is a traveling salesman, always disappearing from the scene. That puts special stresses on the marriage, something worth exploring. By having Henry be, not a traveling salesman, but a time traveler, serves only to make him omniscient. Otherwise he might as well be off selling industrial pumps. He’s just as absent.

So now you have a relationship and a marriage where the guy is omniscient, as all guys wish they were and often pretend they are. Seems that would be intolerable for the woman, but she is happy to know that her destiny is assured. So, incredibly, the time travel theme has no real psychological effect on the characters.

The characters are flat, unchanging, vapid, and unreflective – not interesting people at all, which is surprising, given their unusual circumstances. I found them boring, not believable, and even unlikeable. Adding scene after scene of hot sex does not make them interesting. Everybody has sex. Make a note of it.

The characters would be interesting if we knew more about their desires and frustrations, hopes and fears; doubts and regrets; and the internal contradictions among their feelings. But these characters have almost no interiority, so who cares what they do or say?

The writing is ordinary, the descriptions bland. Each of the two main characters take turns talking in first person, as if in diary entries. Remarkably, their voices are virtually identical and it’s sometimes difficult to remember whose POV we’re in. Not that it matters much.

There are so many questions that could be considered in the presence of a time-traveler: how would the meaning your of life change with each temporal revelation? What is destiny? What is personal responsibility? How would it change your life to know the time and manner of your death? Is love possible when one person knows the future and the other doesn’t? What would you believe if you thought that life was predetermined to the last detail and nothing could be changed? How would your outlook change if you could go back in time and actually see what really happened, what you really were like, what you really said and did.

None of this is touched. The novel is a sentimental sapsucker with a lame, pseudo-fantasy twist. And it’s a huge international best-seller.

Murakami – The Wind-up Bird Chronicle

Dream or Reality?

wind-up-bird-chronicle-haruki-murakami-1Murakami, Haruki (1994/1998). The Wind-up Bird Chronicle. New York: Vintage, 607 pp.

This novel is writing for the sake of writing. There is a nominal plot, but it’s weak. A Japanese woman and her sister are abused by an older brother, who goes on to become a famous politician. The younger sister kills herself. Years later, the older sister kills the brother and goes to prison for it. All this is told by the older woman’s husband, Okada, the first-person narrator who often speaks like a third-person objective narrator with a point of view that seems larger than his natural one.

In the middle of this story are 400 pages of material about the Japanese invasion of Manchuria in WW II, the husband’s unrelated dreams, delusions, and memories; his unrelated interactions with a neighbor girl and two psychic sisters; and his business dealings with a wealthy recluse and her mute son. It’s almost like filler takes up two-thirds of the book and has little or nothing to do with the main story. There are rumors online that an additional 200 more pages of such material were edited out by the American publishers to keep the page count down. If true, that explains the disjointed feel of the middle part of the book.

As with many literary novels then, we can forget about the plot and look to the use of language, structure, and overarching thematic threads. What do we find with that approach?

The language is ordinary, not poetic, not unusual, not unique in any way. Of course, I can only report on the English version, but presumably, if more lyrical language were evident in Japanese, the translator would have provided that.

On the positive side, descriptions have wonderful detail that always keeps the reader grounded in time and place, no easy feat for a novel like this, dominated by dreams, illusions, and delusions. Exposition tends to the philosophical at times, consideration of the meaning of life and death, for example, though these are superficial rather than insightful. Overall, the content of the narration, description, and dialog is always just interesting enough to make you turn the page, and that is, after all, the main goal of any writer.

Thematically, the prospects are more promising. I detect two themes, both conveyed indirectly. One is the idea of taking responsibility for one’s actions. Okada, the main character, doesn’t. He could hardly be more passive, empty-headed, devoid of decisions, and even of agency. He bumps around his house and his city, and does things, sometimes extreme things, for no reason at all. He observes but does not reflect. He wonders but doesn’t analyze. He speaks without commitment.

Likewise, his wife, Kumiko, runs off with another man (supposedly) for no reason that she can explain or that Okada can understand. She just had an “urge.”  Every character is similarly lackadaisical and impulsive, and therefore the reader cannot predict what will happen, and often doesn’t care, since all actions are arbitrary. This arbitrariness extends to the Japanese invasion of Manchuria in World War II.  An extended war story is told second-hand, and in it, the various soldiers do odd things for no rational reason, and no justification is offered for Japan’s invasion of China. It  might be politically daring in Japan to address this topic, for the country even today does not take full responsibility for its actions in the war. To an outsider, however, that confirms the status quo and is not interesting.

The extreme passivity of all the characters might have a purpose. There are hints and intimations, through characters that seem to have precognitive ability, that life is about destiny or fate anyway, so it is literally foolish to suppose personal agency and moral responsibility.

That idea, if it is present, is not well-developed, but is consistent with the second thematic element, the idea that life is just a dream. Throughout the novel, the author draws deliberate ambiguities between dreams and reality, reminiscences and reality, illusion and reality; and emphasizes the fogginess of memory. Technically, the story is utterly realist (apart from some apparently clairvoyant pronouncements by some characters), but Okada reminisces and dreams a lot and at length, and the author uses slippery language to blur the line between the dream world and the real world, until the reader is not sure what to believe. Okada repeatedly says he cannot tell the difference at times. In the dream world, characters walk through walls and appear and disappear and take on each other’s identities and after hundreds of pages, the reader begins to feel a little woozy. If this is a genuine theme (if  I am not over-reading), then it is a masterful representation of the concept that life is just a dream, because when the reader feels a “contact high,” the writer has done an excellent job of conveying the point.

Nevertheless, that theme, like the first, is not well-developed, not articulated, not analyzed, not explained, and might not even be there. So overall, I’d say I liked the tone and the mood of the novel, and especially its creatively original scenes, but I don’t think I’ll be reading anything more by Murakami.

Irving – A Prayer for Owen Meany

A Joke Disguised as a Rant

Prayer for Owen MeanyIrving, John (1989). A Prayer for Owen Meany. 617 pp.

Secondary character John Wheelwright narrates the story of growing up with his friend, main character Owen Meany, a small boy who only grew to 5 feet in adulthood. In small-town New Hampshire, the children make fun of Owen because of his short stature and his high-pitched, always-screaming voice. In the school play of the nativity, Owen plays the baby Jesus. During the humorous fiasco that ensues, he claims to have glimpsed a tombstone with his name and date of his death on it. He immediately believes he has received a vision from God and is God’s chosen instrument. Later, he has a dream in which he envisions the circumstances of his death, which he believes also is a revelation. For the rest of the book Owen pontificates to everyone about destiny and fate and God’s will.

Another storyline setup is that, as children, in a baseball game, Owen hits a line drive that accidentally strikes John’s mother in the head and kills her. Everyone agrees it was a freak accident, but after that, Owen becomes dedicated to helping John, in school and in understanding life as Owen sees it. The incident is reminiscent of the opening car crash in The World According to Garp – a bizarre, low-probability accident that means nothing but sets characters on their psychological journeys.

A third early setup is that John doesn’t know who his father is. His mother became pregnant on a trip to Boston, but would never reveal who the father was. So throughout the book, John is on a quest to learn the identity of his father. That arc is perhaps supposed to parallel Owen’s quest to learn if he really is a chosen instrument of God, but if so, it is a weak and gratuitous story thread.

The narration is divided between an older John, around thirty years old, living in Toronto in the 1980s, a teacher of Canadian literature and virulent critic of American foreign policy, and who reminisces about growing up with Owen in the 1960’s, through grammar school, high school and college. The inclusion of the older narrator does allow a mature, reflective voice to describe the childhood events, which otherwise would have to be described in a child’s voice, but that older narrator is overblown with long digressions into the morality of Ronald Reagan’s involvement in the Iran-Contra scandal, which adds many ranting pages that do not serve the main story line. Maybe the idea is that if you’re politically powerful enough, you can make your own morality, as opposed to Owen, who must follow his destiny, but if that was the point, it was not made economically. The book could have been trimmed of 200 pages without loss.

There is plenty of political ranting about 1960’s-era politics as well, such as criticism of the Vietnam anti-war movement as self-indulgent and hypocritical. Owen believes he is destined to serve in Vietnam so he joins ROTC and becomes a lieutenant in the army. Again, the political diatribes seem to serve little purpose except to establish that Owen is skilled at rationalizing world events to fit his moral rigidity.

In the end, Owen is killed on the day he had foreseen, in a bizarre and not-believable event occurring in Arizona, not Vietnam. Author Irving contrives to reveal the meaning of Owen’s destiny in his final scene – his short stature, high voice, prefigured death – all conspire to “prove” that Owen’s was, after all, a seer and chosen instrument of God. That ending can be read as a self-referential joke on the process of writing, since obviously, an author can make anything mean anything in a fictional work, but by telling the story through John’s “realistic” narration, the strong context at the end leads to, “OMG, Owen Meany really was chosen!”  Given Irving’s ironic sense of humor throughout the novel, I believe the main story of Owen Meany is intended as a wry joke, a parody of blind religious faith. Most reviewers of the book take the spiritual message literally, but that is the heart of the joke, after all.