Do They Review the Same Copy of The Unfortunates?

Now that New Directions’s edition of The Unfortunates is starting to get reviews, I wonder: Is everyone reading the same book?

The idea behind the book is that it’s a collection of unbound signatures that you pick from randomly and read in whatever order chance dictates (only the first and last ones are designated, and those you’re supposed to read as assigned).

So I wonder, is everyone here working with the same text?

I’ve so far seen two reviews of this book. Benjamin Lytal’s review has its virtues, but noticeably lacking is a consideration of what it means to review a book that your readers will likely never read, even if they read it.

John Lingan in Splice Today comment much more thoroughly on the book’s structure. And, although he does consider the question at hand, he seems to dismiss it rather quickly:

Regardless of what order the reader assembles these chapters in, however, the dramatic thrust of The Unfortunates isn’t likely to change; the writing is all first person, comma-heavy stream of consciousness. Each chapter typically corresponds to a specific recollection, such as the friends’ first meeting or the narrator’s late visit to the hospital, and while they contain beautiful passages individually, the novel’s power comes from their accumulation. Together, in whatever order, they form a dual portrait of the narrator’s attempt to write well about a dull football match, and the difficulty imposed on that goal by the haunting memories that accompany the match’s hosting city. . . .

Try reading it simultaneously with a friend, as would no doubt heighten
the touching—and entirely unromanticized—reflections on friendship that
Johnson offers. You’d be reading a physically different book as you
technically read the same one, just as the narrator reflects that,
“everything we know about someone is perhaps not the same, even
radically different from what others, another, may seem or understand
about them, him.”

Perhaps this is true–that whatever order you read it in the experience is more or less equal. But then if this is true, I wonder if Jonson didn’t fail at what he attempted. Because the book does seem to be about encountering the same person differently. Or maybe it’s really about how people are more or less the same, even when encountered differently.

I guess I should read the book for myself.



Recent Posts




Criticism Isn't Free


CR is dedicated to thoughtful, in-depth criticism without regard to what's commercially appealing. It takes tens of hours each month to provide this. Please help make this sort of writing sustainable, either with a subscription or a one-time donation. Thank you!





3 Comments

Got Something To Say:

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

They sell you an unbound book? That’s crazy town!

this was reviewed in the believer this month as well:
http://www.believermag.com/issues/200806/?read=review_johnson
i’ll most definitely be picking one up.

I reviewed The Unfortunates on my lit blog Literary License, and I loved it.
litlicense.blogspot.com

THE SURRENDER

The Surrender is Scott Esposito’s “collection of facts” concerning his lifelong desire to be a woman.


LADY CHATTERLEY'S BROTHER

Two long essays of 10,000 words each on sex in—and out of—literature . . .

The first essay dives in to Nicholson Baker’s “sex trilogy,” explaining just what Baker is up to here and why these books ultimately fail to be as sexy as Baker might wish.

From there the book moves on to the second essay, which explains just why Spaniard Javier Marías does right what Baker does wrong . . .


THE LATIN AMERICAN MIXTAPE

5 essays. 2 interviews.

All in all, over 25,000 words of Latin American literary goodness.

3 never-before-published essays, including “The Digression”—a 4,000-word piece on the most important digression in César Aira’s career.

Shop though these links = Support this site

Copyright © 2016. Powered by WordPress & Romangie Theme.