Comment

May 23, 2013JCLChrisK rated this title 3 out of 5 stars
I give Danielewski points for finding an inventive and original way to tell his story, and for the story itself, which I enjoyed. --- Unfortunately, the frame for the story (that frames a story within it), the form and structure of the words on the page, the artwork, and everything about this book imply there are layers upon layers of meaning to be found by the astute and careful reader. Which means I'm too lazy and obtuse a reader for the book, the layers are too obscure for the average reader, or the form exists for its own sake without offering deeper meaning. I kept trying to break the code of the colored quotation marks, piece together the individual words of the five different narrators or differentiate each one's personality by distinguishing characteristics of their distinct voices, but I had no luck. I tried pronouncing the orphans' strange names in different ways, reading them backwards, making anagrams from them to see if that led anywhere, and again didn't get anything for my efforts. I tried to connect the orphans to the five narrators, considered each invented combination word, wondered about Chintana's connection to the orphans and if it mattered that they were described as orphans instead of simply children--I looked at all the unusual and creative choices he made in the hopes of finding additional layers of meaning, and always felt stymied and frustrated. So, in the end, instead of tickling and entertaining me, those stylistic choices simply hindered my reading of the text. --- It looks cool and creative and intellectual, but I can't say if it actually is.