WARNING: The following post discusses details of Tommy Wallach's novel, We All Looked Up which may spoil the book if you have not read it yet. You've been warned!
In my previous post about This is Where It Ends by Marieke
Nijkamp, I discussed how the author utilized the point-of-view of multiple
characters and a compressed timeline to increase tension and drive the central
conflict of the novel. As I am currently contemplating a new idea where a
similar multi-character perspective could help drive the plot, I have been
reading works that create suspense much in the same way. In this aspect, author
Tommy Wallach’s novel We All Looked Up also
uses a shortened timeline and multiple perspectives in attempt to propel the
narrative to enhance conflict. However, the two-month timespan of Wallach’s
novel often feels unnecessarily stretched out and the obscurity of the ending
leaves readers feeling as if they’ve taken a journey to nowhere.
Primarily, Wallach’s novel is
plagued by having too many possible protagonists which forces him to work
really hard at developing a conflict suitable enough to drive the action of the
novel. Essentially, readers just passively observe the characters waiting for a
comet to either hit the earth or not. Since one of the main antagonists is the
approaching comet itself; therefore, not only do readers deserve to know what
happens to the characters, but a solid story structure demands it. The fact
that Wallach’s ending does not attempt to answer the question it spends two
hundred pages developing is frustrating to say the least. Suspense is a
wonderful device when utilized effectively, but here it feels like a tool to
merely keep the reader interested and hoping the payoff will be worth it in the
end. At times Wallach’s novel teeters between the author’s attempt at creating
suspense and the reader’s frustration at waiting for something (anything) to
happen.
Early in the novel, Peter (a
protagonist among many) has a conversation with one of his teachers which would
appear to set the pace of Wallach’s tale; but it is simply a tease. This
conversation explores the notion of what a good book should be able to do and
ironically exposes what Wallach himself is unable to achieve in his own work.
The teacher tells Peter:
“The
best books, they don’t talk about things you never thought about before. They
talk about things you’d always thought about, but that you didn’t think
anyone else had thought about. You
read them, and suddenly you’re a little bit less alone in the world. You’re part of this cosmic community
of people who’ve thought about this thing, whatever it happens to be” (Wallach 11)
Unfortunately, a closer examination
of this ideal is not explored to fruition in the story itself. The concept that
a novel should explore things in a new way is certainly not groundbreaking and
Wallach’s drawn out narrative explaining how the characters are dealing with
the notion that a comet MIGHT hit Earth seems thin in hindsight since the
ending (or lack thereof) is never fully revealed. While the young adult
audience will certainly be intrigued by the subject matter – the possibility of
civilization as we know it ending – they will likely be just as frustrated with
Wallach’s frequent attempt at over-analyzing, incessant philosophizing, and at
times downright preachy approach to the fragility of humanity.
Young adults read for many of the
same reasons that adults do; however, they are only just beginning to ask the
big questions and authors have a certain responsibility to take this seriously
while giving them room to explore their own hypothesis. Wallach’s authorial
intent at first seems clear from the above passage: seeking to explore the big
questions. But since his attempt at suspense revolves around how the characters
change (or not) while waiting for the comment, it should also build to a
sufficient crescendo for the reader. Furthermore, the secondary and tertiary
characters are not sufficiently developed in a meaningful way and fail to add
to the plot progression but rather extend it almost annoyingly.
Later in the novel, Wallach
continues to weave a philosophical tone that saturates his attempt at
progressing the plot. He points out that “Socrates believed that in a perfect
world, every person would be doing the thing that they were born to do” (113). Now,
while some may view this as the incidental musings of authorial intent, it
becomes almost laughable when consideration is given to the fact that the
characters do not have any real purpose at all aside from their inability to
control what may or may not happen to them.
Even if the reader acknowledges that
in life, endings are not always expected or fair or even clear – the journey of
the characters still needs a sufficient payoff in fiction. While we may never
know why something happens, this novel fails to explore the event actually
happening at all which feels like a terrible waste of time. If Wallach intended
to make a statement about the pointlessness of life, he could have at least
given his novel the gift of that singular idea. Instead, he teeters – often
taking one step forward and another three back. Readers want to see something happen
or feel the ending has sufficiently satisfied the characters’ arc. Instead
Wallach’s own work drones on while also echoing the “mistaken belief that
anything [can] last forever” (330). By leaving the big questions unanswered he
actually illegitimatizes the characters and the journey altogether.
It is also worth noting that the
story ends with the characters “praying for mercy” (370) – literally. This
creates more questions without answers and results in nothing but frustration.
Where did God enter the picture? If not God, then to whom are they praying? And
most importantly – did the comet hit or miss them? This journey of
self-discovery hinges on the characters discovering something – anything! And
what began as a series of questions ends with even more. At least, one thing is
consistent and that’s Wallach’s abstract approach to tangible ideas: the
pressure of unfulfilled dreams, the end of the world, the human connection.
Essentially, for a novel to leave
the reader with a sense of completion, there has to be a sense of completion in
the work. So, I fundamentally believe the best, most realistic novels are the
ones that force us to face a problem and deal with the aftermath the best way
we (and the characters) know how. In the end, if this is also left obscure,
suspense, character motivation, and the very progression of the plot seems to
be all in vain. And no matter the topic, no reader wants to feel as if their
time has been wasted.
No comments:
Post a Comment