by Coleson Whitehead
My theory is that he did such a good job on his book Underground Railroad, a Times bestseller, that the editors didn't put much effort into this. No, I didn't find mispellings or bad grammar--that's not what I'm complaining about. But there are context switches that leave the reader bewildered, and there are things unexplained that should have been explained. I knew all about the Dozier Academy on which the book was based, so I understood everything that was happening. But would anyone else?
Most of the episodes--his beating, interactions with the other boys and the staff--were written through the eyes of the one participating. As such they are real, but understated. You don't fully get the horror if you don't step back to see. I know this sounds absurd--isn't the full horror of a bad experience best told by the experiencee? But it's not. Haven't you ever been in a scary situation where a certain numbness overtakes your brain and you simply react? But it's only afterward that you get the shakes.
So it's the details that would have brought the story alive, and those details are missing. In a way I was grateful--I already knew them and didn't look forward to hearing them again. But I could have skipped over, and someone who didn't know, still wouldn't know. Possibly the problem was in telling the story from only one person's perspective.
No comments:
Post a Comment