The gist of the novel is that a pair of British high school graduates have a one night stand, and thereafter become best friends of sorts. Each chapter is an annual snapshot of their lives (July 15th of every year). The book follows them for 20 years as they grow together and apart, yada yada.
Specifically, I want to talk about Nicholls' indiscrete manipulation of character. We only see one day of Dexter and Emma (the two main characters) each year. Given the format of the book, Nicholls focuses on molding and shifting the reader's opinion of the two characters as with each chapter. He does this blatantly so the reader is consciously pulled to and away from his characters. As a reader, I found my awareness of Nicholls' control over me both discomforting and awe-striking.
The more potent of the two characters is definitely Dexter in his perpetually young recklessness. He is the player; the suave, girl-a-week type who has always held a special place in his heart for Emma. Thanks to his internal monologues that Nicholls includes every few chapters, we readers love Dexter because we know he means well. However there is a point in the story, when Dexter becomes particularly lost in his booze and pursuit of fame, where his self-awareness turns skewed. This is when I most admire Nicholls as a writer. I admire him because he bends the rules by offering a solid two chapters where Dexter has literally no redeeming qualities. His arrogance, which in the start of the novel was clearly a defense mechanism, has crept into his true character and he's too drunk (and self-riteous) to see it. Nicholls turns things up a level from your average rom-com novel by daring the reader to lose faith in Dexter. He can get away with it because Dexter's integrity is already established in his perpetual love for Emma. In the two chapters of Dexter's rock bottom, he does not speak to Emma at all, further polarizing the reader's view of each character.
On a benign level, Nicholls' craft reminds of a grossly funny documentary called the Aristocrats. In the documentary, one of the interviewed comedians says that the "Aristocrats" joke is so funny because it touches upon the few taboos that are still taboo. Nicholls nudges at the taboos of romantic novels first by daring us to despise his male lead. Of course, we are cheering for Dexter the whole time, waiting for the moment that Emma will come and redirect him to find his old, purer self. Nicholls bends the rules a second time by having it be another woman, not Emma, who lifts him out of his drunken stupor. (I'll post a spoiler alert at the top of this one - sorry guys I'm new at this). Intruigingly, the finality of this second offense is the only moment in the book thus far where I have been tempted to put it down. After taking us trudging through their complicated (and obviously destined) history, it is unfair for Nicholls to suddenly reveal to us that maybe Em and Dex won't be together forever. That's the whole deal with a romantic novel: the reader remains pseudo-happy through the characters’ misery, comforted by the secret knowledge that by the end the two lovers will find their way back stronger than ever in their almost brokenness. PHYSCH! Not going to happen here. I'm so frustrated at his daringness, and yet I love this David Nicholls guy for having the balls to disappoint us all.
There is a chance I'm not so good at this book review thing simply because I am so hot with emotion over this story. It's an odd sensation to stop right around the climax to analyze how the book affects me, instead of just letting it wash over me as I go. Due to my eagerness to return to the book, I'm not sure if my points are coming across clearly. That will have to be fixed at some point, but not before I go finish this sucker!
No comments:
Post a Comment