Drip on?
Acknowledge. Gimme the Verbaluce, and make it snappy.
So I can like, freestyle re my sentences and thoughts, in elevated diction, my well-articulated thoughts recorded here for future analysis, both yours, dear imagined and projected reader, and mine, when in my waning years of sanity I pore over these blog entries from this, the year I am (was) 42, thoughts of, approximately: how George Saunders reveals through his creations the extent to which we are all responsible. He places within our reach mental images of worlds we have never inhabited (a yard bereft of glee in which our father projects himself onto a pole; a prison in which we, the bad guys, forced into decisions via mind-altering drugs, yet find the will to resist; TorchLightNight in the Grove of Sorrow; above/beneath the surface of a Switzerlandish pond) and when we enter them we sense the odd rightness and wrongnesses of our own worlds.
 |
| E.B.B. |
Until we reach the end of the story.
Until something in the drip begins to wane. Until we get another one.
Might I be addicted to his stories?
Drip on?
Acknowledge.
What's in it?
Hilarious.
How do I love thee?
Let me count the ways.
One of my favorite stories by George Saunders is "Escape from Spiderhead." I think it details so many of the fundamental aspects that people who write stories can sometimes take for granted. Saunders has the main character in that piece address the drugs that he's being administered that can influence his way of thinking through his own verbal cue.
ReplyDeleteThese small things that can leave the main character Jeff in a state of illusion while maintaining his sense of reality on his surroundings allow the story to pertain the illusion that Jeff is actually control of his actions as he sometimes thinks through his way of finding out the details of the experiments that go on around him. I think the ending of "Esacpe from Spiderhead" is perfect and fits so well in the underlying contrasts of control and choices that lives in the story as a whole.
The way George Saunders writes is unique in its own way and seems to be built around the way the story is supposed to feel like. It allows the reader to get a better understanding of what is going and also allows them to connect easier to the voice of the narrators.
Saunders’ stories tend to have the jarring effect of putting the reader in a very new and invented (and somewhat futuristic) setting without offering much explanation. One of Saunders’ strengths is that he can do that to the reader and still make them want to read on by the engaging and often humorous way he writes. I found that that applied particularly in “Escape from Spiderhead.” It takes a kind of leap of faith to follow the writer into a story like this, but it’s worth the risk. Of course, Saunders get heavy-handed sometimes. I especially notice it in “Sticks” but it’s also there in “Escape from Spiderhead” when the narrator is going through his little “epitome” at the end. I think Saunders is more valuable for his unique story ideas and his off-beat humor than for his characterization. As I mentioned in another blog post, many of his characters are essentially the same person is mildly different situations. But the situations tend to be so interesting that they compensate for that.
ReplyDeleteBesides the “American dream,” which we see a lot of in “Semplica-Girl Diaries,” another one of Saunders’ favorite themes seems to be language. “My Chivalric Fiasco” and “Escape from Spiderhead” both show characters being manipulated by chemicals to speak in a more sophisticated way even as they are being asked to do the most barbaric things, and I find that juxtaposition really interesting.
Having had a few weeks since I first read George Saunders, I can't say that I enjoy him much more, overall, than I did when I first started reading him, but I've refined my reasons for disliking him, and to a certain extent, I think it's simply a matter of my personal taste: one of my reasons for not liking him is simply that I don't share his sense of humor very much at all (though there are occasionally moments that get me laughing, as in The Chivalric Fiasco: "Gossip & Slander . . . would, for sure, reach the Ear of poor dumbfuck Nate soon withal." I'm a sucker for rapid shifts in diction), and to a large degree this might very well be on me, since my sense of humor is rather plebby. What it amounts to, I guess, is that I read lines like, "Get going. It's not funny. She's right up in my grill," and "Gzeemon shall indeed be limping for the next nine million years, poor bloke," and the whole father/farther/stepfarther wordplay sequence also in the title story, and I feel nothing.
ReplyDeleteMore than that, though, I'm not very fond of his style. It's somewhat evident in the quotes that I chose up there, and to a certain degree I guess it comes down to the way that Saunders's style is built so much from his sense of humor. But there's also the matter of my not liking how, as I said in my previous blog, it twists around and adds a writerly aspect to manners of speaking that I don't admire very much, and the result of this is that I can't take his work any more seriously (not tonally, but in terms of simple artistic appreciation) than any other "quirky" piece. It's not that his stories ought to be fully, or even significantly grim; and it's not that I can't handle syntactical complexity; but his prose is so distractingly playful that I can rarely engage him beyond it, and even when I do, I find myself bored because a significant part of any given story most likely ties into the negative effects of capitalism/consumerism and the need to rise up against the shady institutions that result from them. His story ideas, at least at the basic level, are neat enough that I think he would have earned distinction writing about them in any way, and when he gets down to it without affected playfulness he writes well, so I wish that he had let his stories speak more for themselves.
Though it's such a short piece, "Sticks" was my favorite story out of the ones that we're discussing tomorrow (and in the collection) because of how little it resembles any of his other stories. First of all, the length of it meant that Saunders didn't have as much room for affectation, as in pieces that are anywhere from 30 to 60 pages long. I also really like the idea of the story - watching a man go insane as reflected in a prop that he's placed outside (though admittedly the idea isn't as interesting as those in "Escape from Spiderhead" and "My Chivalric Fiasco," nor does it have the empathetic potential of "Tenth of December") - and found that the way he carried it off through quickly-given but vivid details and the eventual cries for help worked very well on a purely emotional level. In those moments, I can really appreciate Saunders's raw skill without finding that his ideas are diminished at all for his relative stylistic normalcy.
Escape from Spiderhead would have to be my favorite story of the bunch, and once again, I'm going to cite Chekov for one of the reasons why.
ReplyDeleteOne of the definding points to Chekov's works is not just that nothing happens but that the characters themselves seem to be aware nothing happens. They make all of these aspirations but never ever act on them. How does this link with Spiderhead? The scene when Heather dies. The scientists involved wax poetic about how it was a shame that she died and that it will never happen again... only to call Rachel in to make it happen again. It adds a generous dose of dark humor to the tale.
Perhaps a better touchstone for this story is 1984, the mother of all dystopias. Human reason is once again thrown in the back seat and I daresay that the idea of doublethink is used. The term doublethink refers to the ability to hold two contradictory ideas in ones head yet agree with both at once (an example of which being that drugs are bad, yet eliminating them completely would also be bad.) It would appear the scientists are using the prospect of doublethink, yet the humor comes from the fact that they seem unaware of this. An example? The doctor keeps the door unlocked to show he is unafraid of the test subjects, yet he uses a code name and ensures that all of their packs are filled with compliance juice.
And of course there is the quirky aspect of the story. The brand-name drugs. The scientists swearing. The mention of driving Jeff to the drug store to pick up anti-fungi medication. There is some level of humanity in this story somewhere; perhaps its meant as a parody in that the men running this mad science experiment aren't acting like mad scientists at all.
Saunders has a very interesting way of writing that shines through in just about everything he writes. You can easily tell if something is written by George Saunders for that black comedy and surrealist type of writing-style he has. I love how he handles it all like its ordinary. I don't know maybe it all seems very ordinary to him? But he doesn't dwell on over-explanations, he just expects his readers to follow his lead and "get it." I think anyone who is willing can easily "get it."
ReplyDeleteI defiantly think the best story we had to read was "Escape from Spiderhead" and a lot of that is because of what I just mentioned. It is a weird story, with some odd "Clockwork Orange"-esque language to it (the bizarre words used come across so normal it never seems stupid or out-of-place). I also like how the story uses strong and absurd language. Saunders seems to always prefer that, going one step above a simple "fuck" which most authors would usually just stick with to add tension or maturity. Saunders takes it one step further by not just saying "fuck" leading to something that doesn't come across as mature, but it sure sticks out more than the mundane use of the swear-word that every author and their cousin uses. I think it also adds to the surrealist tone of Saunders' stories. It is not a "kitchen sink realist" or "angry young man" drama with people throwing things and yelling all the time about mature themes, it is twisted and interesting so it never feels like something I've seen a million times before. It is a story filled with black comedy yet we are able to take it seriously when it needs to be taken seriously, it is the "Brazil" of our short story assignments.
I have so many things to say about George Saunders that I'm not even sure where to begin. I guess what strikes me about his writing the most is his very distinct style. When I first began reading some of his more stylistically-liberal stories, I had to teach myself how to follow the jumbled syntax that, after close attention, begins to make sense and show the structural genius. I found myself unable to read over any parts of the stories; I become so invested in the commentary and so captured by his sense of humor that I find myself paying extra close attention to every word in the case that I miss something.
ReplyDeleteMy favorite story in Tenth of December is probably Escape from Spiderhead. I say this because it has stayed with me the most, and even though it didn't engage in the very Saunders-specific play on syntax, it was the kind of story that didn't need that word play to drive the story forward. It is as much social commentary as it is inventive fiction, and it resonates with me in a similar way to writers like David Foster Wallace or Kurt Vonnegut. They all take this keen observance of the fundamental problems of our culture and human nature and shove it back in our faces that leaves you unsure if you want to laugh or cringe; or, your laughter peters off as you realize that the silliness is actually reminiscent of something much darker, and we're laughing at ourselves in the way we might laugh at an offensive joke -- with an uncomfortable kind of knowing. Part of Saunders's massive popularity can probably be attributed to the little thrill readers feel when they see someone calling our culture on its problems in a self-aware kind of way that resorts to humor to make everyone in the room a little lighter.
I really enjoyed Escape from Spiderhead. As everyone is saying, his style is really unique and engages the reader. I was a little irritated by the little “re” that is prevalent in the dialogue, but I could overlook that to see the story. I found myself being really curious about what these people had done for them to be placed in this. But, I feel like he writes in a way that it doesn’t really matter how they got there, just that they are there. I was really struck by how well we as readers feel the characters emotions and go through the transitions as well with the character. We see his sudden infatuation just as clearly and rapidly as he feels it. We feel his confusion when he realizes that everyone had just had sex with everyone else. He isn’t upset, but he isn’t completely indifferent either. However, I felt like the ending was definitely earned and that it was the moment when he finally took control
ReplyDeleteTo be honest, it was hard for me to really become interested in George Saunders stories. Something about his writing confused me, and still does somewhat, that I wasn’t completely captured by the stories. I enjoyed “Semplica Girl Diaries” a little bit more than some of the ones we are going to discuss in class. It was hard for me to find the meaning in My Chilvaric Fiasco and the title story, Tenth of December. I think Saunders writes with a very distinct voice and that voice I not something that I am accustomed to reading. I think it would take more practice for me to be able to fully comprehend his stories and really understand his voice.
ReplyDeleteEscape from Spiderhead was definitely my favorite in this group of stories. Although the concept is definitely different, my attention was focused the entire time and I was encapsulated by the story. While reading, it reminded me strangely of the Holocaust. I learned while abroad with I visited Dachau that prisoners were experimented on while they stayed at the concentration camps. This was something I didn’t know before and while reading Escape from Spiderhead, it eerily reminded me of experimental studies on prisoners, except in Spiderhead, these people had commit crimes.
I look forward to hearing George Saunders speak next week and to also hear what others in the class have to say about his writing. I think something that I learned from reading these stories, is that it’s acceptable to push the boundaries in writing, especially with syntax. We have the freedom as writers.
I was engaged by the style with which he wrote all the stories I've read. I like finding authors that have a unique style because it makes me think more about the piece a whole, and not split the style and the story. I kept finding all these connections that made me think of other things I've read. The stories kept me intrigued as to what was going to happen within them. The characters still have room for reader speculation, which I've always felt like is a fine line that the writer is in a constant back and forth with. I love the way his syntax is so layered. It makes it so I didn't mind re-reading the stories. It made it almost exciting, which was something that I hadn't felt for any of the other authors that we've read so far. There was a sense of excitement for them too, but the sense that I got from reading George Saunders's pieces was a different sort. It got rid of every compliant I might have had about re-reading. From the story in BASS, I got that sense, but with the stories in Tenth of December, I started really feeling it, because I'd already read them, but I wasn't thinking about anything else at the time. What I felt like what driving my want to read these stories was the stories that the characters were telling. I felt like they were in shells, and the way Saunders wrote their stories was their way of breaking out of these shells.
ReplyDeleteEscape from Spiderhead was my favorite. I wasn't bothered by the fact the reader never finds out why the characters were there in the first place. The thought never even crossed my mind until I started reading other people's blog posts, and that made me intrigued about it. I liked how not every detail was there. It made me take an interest in these characters, that I wanted to find out their story.
When I read "Escape from Spiderhead" for the first time, I really was intrigued and perplexed by the strange, futuristic scientific experiments being performed on Jeff. I reread it, and the second time around, things became much clearer to me. Subtleties that slipped by me on the first read were caught and I had become more acquainted with Saunders' writing style after reading the other stories.
ReplyDeleteWhat I really liked about "Escape from Spiderhead" were the consistencies maintained throughout the plot about specific details on the experiment, the chemicals injected in the MobiPaks and how they affected the patients. The straight forwardness and simplicity of the dialogue was also consistent, supporting the interestingly different plot. I really liked the premise of the story, and the character setup of Jeff as the observer and asker of questions really helped shed light on topics we as readers would be confused about
Like many of my classmates, my favorite was “Escape from Spiderhead.” I think that George Sounders has a very unique style, and some of his pieces may be harder to get into. I did not enjoy all of them, but I was surprised by how much I liked “Escape from Spiderhead.” I read many of the pieces all together, and this was one that I could easily remember. It is different from anything else I have read. Jim compared it to “1984,” a book I had to read for class a few years ago. I did not really enjoy that dystopia, but yet this one was different.
ReplyDeleteThere was humor in the piece, along much was on the darker side. The names of the medicines and injections all reflect their purpose. I think the humor is very interesting, because the content is very serious, but Sounders allows the audience to see the seriousness in their own time. When the audience reflects on the humor, they can see its dark side. Sounders makes his pieces more accessible through the language, diction, and humor.
I was also struck by the emotions of the piece. Sounders does not write in a sentimental way, and he does not clearly state the emotions of all of his characters, but the reader is able to understand. Although he put his characters in very unique situations, such as this futuristic prison that uses science to control the inmates, the audience is able to connect to them. They are still very accessible and human.
As Catherine stated, the language is very engaging. I really enjoyed the honesty of the narrator. He tells us what he is feeling as he falls in love, out of love, and when he is forced to be a part of torture. The audience is able to see Jeff’s personality. Sounders’s main character Jeff is asked “Would you like to go back? It’s completely up to you. Your body appears salvageable” and he responds “No, I thought, no thanks, I’ve had enough. My only regret was Mom” (80). Jeff gives a simple answer, but we see how he is willing to remain dead than return to Spiderhead. I think Sounders did a great job of drawing his audience in and making them care.
Though a lot of people are talking about “Escape from Spiderhead,” I want to focus more on the title piece, “Tenth of December.” Looking at the collection as a whole, I feel like Saunders plays a lot of attention to point of view and how he can use point of view in a not so traditional way. “Tenth of December,” for me, has such vibrant contrast between Robin and Donald’s perspective, the two functioning almost as separate stories in the beginning. Saunders’ style characterizes and distinguishes these two characters through close third person. Saunders has a way of getting into his characters’ heads while also having this outwardly view of the story’s world. With “Tenth of December,” Saunders mimics Donald’s crumbling thoughts, showing how Donald makes these errors in his head and then corrects them. With this, Saunders reveals his characters through the way they think, how Donald mentally reacts to seeing a boy fall through the ice or as Donald realizes that today isn’t actually the day he is meant to die. Something similar can be said about Robin. Saunders thrusts us into this story through Robin’s imagination. We first see the world through Robin’s imaginary adventures to fight the Netherworlders. Rather than telling the reader that Robin is such and such years old with this kind of home life and this kind of attitude toward life, Saunders takes us into the scene with Robin’s imaginary world. We can gain a deeper sense of who Robin is by the actions he takes, by the strange things he does and how he thinks about those things. Though we have spoken a lot in class about revealing the most important basic details in the first page or two of our stories, I feel like Saunders is the exception to this rule. Saunders begins “Tenth of December” with Robin scoping out the Nethers. Rather than explain to the reader exactly what is going on, Saunders trusts that the reader will hop on board, requiring a suspension of disbelieve within the first paragraph, if not within the first sentence. And I think this is where Saunders is able to hook the reader. He does not spell out the situation, but rather lets it sit there like it is normal. Through the perspectives of his characters, he makes their minds and actions seem real and worth investing the time to get to know. If Saunders were to explain Robin to the readers on the first page, we would be less likely to continue. I think we would be less likely to invest in the character and accept the imaginary world he creates for himself.
ReplyDeleteAh, Escape From Spiderhead. I’ve been waiting to talk about you for a long, long time. I love this piece. I think Saunders’ style really comes through beautifully in everything he rights, that cloying, mocking undertone that sits on the eyes right and leaves just enough for the reader, but in this story the balance was perfect. This story does a lot of what Semplica Girl was getting at — it ultimately critiques a lot of the attitudes of humanity in a way that is so caught between whimsical and horrific that it works. George Saunders knows how to get me where it hurts. And this story, more than the others, did that for me.
ReplyDeleteSaunders is a psychological fiend. He understands how to manipulate his reader and get into the heart of what they feel. This story circulated so completely around this idea of emotions. I have read one review that labelled this story world as the ultimate dystopia/utopia, and I would have to agree. What if you could get love — serious, all consuming love — handed to you on a silver platter? But then you witness the tragic fall, where this person is not who you think but some other, where you feel separate from what feelings just were. At its heart, I think this story is about primal human wants. Jeff seems to have a lot of them, and what works so well in Saunder’s story is the way that he lets them develop out naturally. This is not an info dump kind of deal, this is a slow roll where Jeff becomes who he is slowly and quietly.
Jeff to me is the perfect character vehicle for this story. At first, we don’t really know who he is and what he wants, but then pretty soon we are making conclusions about him and seeing where he rests on the moral scale — somewhere between opposed to suffering and criminal. In a way, Jeff seems to represent the sort of basic human condition to me. He doesn’t give people a lot of slack, he is happy saying someone is unattractive if they are, he’s made (big) mistakes, he wishes for more, he admits that he’s lost, he welcomes grand emotions, doesn’t know what to do with himself when they are taken away. I think that the reader is able to see themselves a little in Jeff, and that makes him this FOIL for the reader’s own thoughts.
What I really want to dive into quickly is the ending. This story confuses my thoughts to a certain degree because of how many I have, but I feel as if this ending is important. I know this story has been critiqued for the way that Saunders makes this ultimate life conclusion at the end that in depth everything is a reset, and people start new, and I know that many believed it went too far. I think the ending is hard to grab a hold of, because it sort of doesn’t feel like it follows the traditional trail of the story. But I would disagree that it doesn’t necessarily work. I think that in a way Saunders is using this story to explore the base emotional aspect of humanity in all its beauty and dirtiness. There is something poetic, to me, that these cycles repeat, over and over again, even as a clean slate is received in death. That I think, also has its own level of tragedy — the understanding that humanity can’t run from these notions of love, greed, passion, struggle, etc. I would defend the ending, I think, even in the face of its individuality.
I did not like George Saunders as much as I thought I would. I feel like he was built up to be this great writer and I have to say his stories didn't hold my attention very well. "My Chivalric Fiasco" was probably the worse one. I had no idea where the story was taking place, physically and in time. And the way it was narrated seemed to have changed to a more Shakespearean play type way of speaking. It was very difficult to get through this piece and by the end I didn't feel anything towards the characters.
ReplyDelete"The Tenth of December" was alright. I had a hard time getting through this one too. The only thing I liked about it was how the point of view changed from the boy to the man but at the same time I felt disconnected from the characters and it was distracting when they heard voices in their head that helped them make the decisions they made. I also didn't fully understand the man's character or why the boy went out in the woods in the first place.
"Sticks" wasn't bad. It was short and easy to follow. I like short shorts like that because I'm given a lot of detail and background I feel. But I think my favorite one was "Escape from Spiderhead". I read this one last so I really didn't have any expectations for it after not enjoying the other three but I was instantly drawn in by the way it was written and the subject. I thought it was neat how Saunders showed the effects of drugs on people and how they feel things they usually don't or what they're like when they're coming off of them. As I was reading this all I kept thinking about was horrible places where human beings are being tested or places where people rather die than continue living there. Obviously the first place that came to mind was the Holocaust where the people there were used for medical experiments and many people would have rather died and be put out of the everyday torture and misery. And we see this in "Escape from Spiderhead".Jeff takes the drug that nearly killed Rachel and he ends up killing himself because he couldn't stand the place anymore. I thought it was interesting when the story kept going even after Jeff died. This reminded me of "Bullet in the Brain" where the character is still narrating. At first I didn't know Jeff was dead I thought I missed something when he said he escaped through the roof. I had to reread that part to realize he had died, he had killed himself because that was the only way out of Spiderhead. I think this story has a lot of deeper meanings to it and I would love to hear what everybody else has to say in the class discussion.
After reading so much George Saunders lately, the only conclusion I’ve come to is that his writing is odd. I don’t particularly like his work. As I said in class last week when we were discussing his other stories, that his stories remind me of Brave New World, which was not one of my favorites that we had to read in class. He takes these really obscure things and puts them in with a normal everyday event and sees what happens. Like in My Chivalric Fiasco, where we have the boss, Don Murray and Martha have an affair and ask Ted to keep it quiet, but he blurts it out in the end getting himself fired. This part of the story is completely normal. Now, add in the KnightLyfe drug and the fact that these people work in a really weird reenactment place and you have yourself a George Saunders story.
ReplyDeleteI think the reason that My Chivalric Fiasco was my favorite just because it was so weird. I mean Ted took a pill that made him speak in a weird like old English accent. It just made the entire thing really funny and really weird to read. As the reader, I was sitting there thinking, “Can you actually take him seriously when he’s talking like that?” It made it even funnier when Don Murray was like, “Put a sock in it or I will flush you down the shitter so fast” (211). This was one of those stories that made a lot more sense the second time around, and it was probably funnier the second time because it made a lot more sense.
The weird thing about Saunders’s writing is that they are all structured slightly different. Some have quotation marks, some don’t. My Chivalric Fiasco used (:) when people were talking. I feel like a lot of his stories have these strange ironies in them and I was sitting there reading it going, “Oh, this is not going to end well.” But most of his stories don’t. Like the Semplica Girl Diaries and Sticks, they kind of end in this weirdly sad place, but you can also just sit back and laugh at how weird the characters were.
George Saunders is not one of my favorites. I’ve read a few of his stories in past years but none Tenth of December reminded me a lot of The title story Tenth of December was not my favorite; however, something I admired was the skill behind the ways in which the story shifted in and out of reality. I really liked that reality in the end takes over after the main character survives but am not sure why I didn’t like the story as a whole. I think that the constant switch from reality and imagination took me too far out of it.
ReplyDeleteMy favorite story was Sticks. Although it's so short, it sticks out and can stand on it's own. Like the rest of the stories in the collection, it forces so many strong and deep emotions onto the reader. I agree with Shawn that the idea itself is not inherently interesting, although Saunders makes it interesting. The story is about a father who has this tall pole in his front yard that he decorates for every holiday, but after his wife died he slowly slipped into insanity as he began to decorate it in weird ways. I think I really like the end when we find that one of the first things the new owners of the house did was to take out that pole. It just goes on to convey this underlying idea that i think echos throughout many of Saunders' stories, this idea of a lack of true legacy and "meaningful death" (in stories like "Escape from Spiderhead").