Literary Fugitive Pieces by Anne Michaels

[fantasyfan]

As I continue, I am growing more interested in this book and finding the narrative style engrossing. Ffor instance, at one point Jakob says this regarding the influence of Athos upon him:

"I was transfixed by the way time buckled, met itself in pleats and folds; . . ."

This could be an image for the narrative method of Michaels herself. As others have noted, she creates memory strata. As one can look at the various layers of rock, so one can look at the various layers of memory. Each sratum is unique but the whole provides a record which is greater than any individual moment.

In particular, I loved the sections detailing with the Scott Antarctic Expedition. On one level it failed; on another it was a powerful affirmation of humanity.

The actual story-line so far seems thin. But the narrative technique is very rich. I frequently feel that I am reading a profound meditation rather than a novel.

[Synamon]

My hold at the library came through on this yesterday and I'm about a third of the way through. I haven't read the comments in this thread yet in case there are spoilers, but I am getting a Canadian vibe from the book.

I've noticed before with Canadian writers that there is a feeling of detachment from the story they are telling, a witness to history or observer point of view. As a young, peaceful nation we haven't participated in as many dramatic events as other countries, so it's easier to be detached from world events. Or maybe my impression says more about me and the authors I've chosen to read than about Canadian writers, but I thought I'd comment anyway.

[Bookpossum]

That's an interesting thought, Synamon. I'll have to think about whether the same is true of Australian writers, as there are many similarities between the experiences of Canadians and Australians as colonies, part of the Empire and now Commonwealth, and a nation of immigrants with the consequent disinheritance of the Indigenous peoples. We certainly spent a lot of time in our past distancing ourselves from that part of our history!

[Synamon]

Finished!

I had issues when Ben popped up. I went back and reread what came before and skimmed ahead to try and figure out what was going on because it was very confusing to me. As others have commented, the voices of Jacob and Ben were similar.

I reacted negatively to Michaela as well, I felt she interrupted Jacob's communication with me. A reader jealous of someone else getting into the character's head? Perhaps. Mostly I didn't care about Michaela or Ben, I was emotionally invested only in Jacob. I ended up skimming most of Ben's history, rushing to the end once Jacob was gone.

The language in the book was beautiful and soothing, without it the horrors of the story would have been hard to take. Gotta run, off to visit the mountains, I'll be thinking about this book for a while longer, I don't think it's all sunk in yet.

[caleb72]

Originally Posted by Synamon

FI reacted negatively to Michaela as well, I felt she interrupted Jacob's communication with me.

Yes! I think you've put it well.

Strangely enough, I felt somewhat betrayed by Ben as well with the introduction of Michaela. I also wasn't terribly invested in Ben. Although I was warming to him - until Michaela. At that point I ceased to care.

[paola]

slowly catching up with you guys...
So, I finished it too, and I loved it - or I should say, I loved the Jakob Beer part, but felt Ben's narration was kind of disjointed for the rest. Did not see his voice as duplicating Jakob's, and indeed for some reason I found myself annoyed with the sex. Nothing moral there, only it felt an extraneous add on, and why and how he falls for Petra is also somewhat "artificial". Is this Michaels' view of men and lust? In fact, I found myself pondering at various points "here we have a woman writer talking in a man's voice, isn't she good", but this thought was also distracting. Is she trying too hard, or is it me (i.e. my feminist side going in overdrive)?

Anyhow, I loved it!

[HomeInMyShoes]

I'm quite relieved that most enjoyed the book for the most part.

For those that want to read more Canada, I'll say that I have read four of the other nominees and here are my thoughts on them:

Indian Horse by Richard Wagamese is fabulous. Very Canadian with themes on the residential schools and hockey. I'm going to read more by Wagamese as it was written so well. I laughed and was hurt by this book at the same time. It sank deep in my brain.

February by Lisa Moore is fabulous and probably my favourite from the year so far. She had me in the first ten pages and it was just a visceral read for me. An author I will also read more from.

A Good Man by Guy Vanderhaege is a fine read about Major Walsh and his relationship with Sitting Bull (whom my mom's step-mom knew quite well.) I loved reading this book for the setting because my mom's family was from the area described in the book. For those that like historical fiction it should be on their lists to read. An author I will read more from.

No Great Mischief by Alistair MacLeod is a nice read about the working class from Cape Breton. It is also probably the most difficult of the books I've read so far from Canada this year. Slightly disjointed, but it does open up. It's not easy at times. It's fragmented. In the end it is about family.

These books are more Canadian in theme.

[sun surfer]

I didn’t like the book. It was unfortunate. I like poetry, classical music, non-plot-driven meditations and international settings all, and I even thought parts of the book, some turns of phrase and certain atmopheric settings (such as Athos’ Zakynthos house) were beautiful, but this book just didn’t coalesce in a good way for me.

It was all a bit overdone. I didn’t mind the style and I don’t mind a realistic book sometimes seeming contrived, but the contrivances here were too much for me and so it all ended up muddled.

This book focuses on one particular war horror and uses it as the basis and symbol for the entire book. While I can understand that decision, I’m not a huge fan of books that dwell on war horrors. I look past this if I like a book and I wanted to here, but because I didn’t like the book I couldn’t.

There is a question of authenticity and artificiality. This story struck me more as an outsider writing that hasn’t quite captured the reality they were hoping for. I think Michaels was successful with places, but not with people.

Also, some characters were too good, too perfect or even too sympathetic for the depth and complexity that Michaels was reaching for and it struck me as off-kilter.

Finally, while the novel and situation is unique, the Holocaust seems an overly obvious choice. It is so horrific and so often used. If an author doesn’t have an intimate relationship with it because of location, family history, etc., then I may be critical of why it was chosen as a subject. Michaels was mostly subtle on this point except for the many flashbacks, but it was the springboard for everything that followed including the anguish, and thus to me was one of the more major contrivances.

I do see why others like and even love the novel but it just didn’t work for me. Regardless, thanks HIMS for a wonderful list of books. Bad luck on my part with this one in particular but there were many others on your list that I’m now aware of and looking forward to reading some day.

[caleb72]

Originally Posted by HomeInMyShoes

I'm quite relieved that most enjoyed the book for the most part.

For those that want to read more Canada, I'll say that I have read four of the other nominees and here are my thoughts on them:

February by Lisa Moore is fabulous and probably my favourite from the year so far. She had me in the first ten pages and it was just a visceral read for me. An author I will also read more from.

Yes, when I saw this one it went straight onto my wishlist as I thought it looked like a fascinating read.

Although I wasn't totally floored by Anne Michaels, I was really happy to see a Canadian author focus. I was secretly hoping for Atwood but I understand why you left her off the selection list.

Thanks for giving me a whole new list of authors to consider.

[Bookpossum]

Yes, I'll second that. Many thanks for the great list HIMS, which I shall also be exploring further.

Sorry you didn't like the book,sun surfer. I seem to remember reading somewhere (but now can't find the reference) that earlier generations of Michaels' family were Holocaust survivors, and so she may have been drawing on family experiences, even though clearly she was not a survivor herself. She is certainly listed as being a Jewish Canadian author.

I expect that as with most Australian Jews, nearly all Canadian Jews have lost family members from that terrible time. So if that is the case with Anne Michaels, she could not help but be influenced by her family's history and experiences.

I didn't have any feeling that she was in any way exploiting the experiences of others of the Holocaust, but rather writing a meditation on those experiences of horror, grief, loss and the need to remember.

[sun surfer]

Bookpossum, I wouldn't say that I feel people generally exploit the Holocaust, but rather that it is an oft-used choice when choosing something heavy and horrific to include in a book. It can feel possibly a bit easy to me, as if it were the "It was a dark and stormy night" of recent war horrors, unless the author has some personal connection to it spurring them on. I agree that Michaels' goal was to write, as you say, "a meditation on those experiences of horror, grief, loss and the need to remember."

I've looked into it further just now and her direct family wasn't involved in the Holocaust as her mother is from Canada and her father immigrated from Poland before the war, but her extended family was - all of her father's relatives seem to have perished. I found it in this article. The first paragraph was especially interesting given the criticism we're discussing:

"Not another book on the Holocaust,” a friend of author Anne Michaels lamented, as he came across a new book on the subject, unaware that the first novel Michaels was then working on had a Holocaust theme. “That galvanized me in an important way,” she tells The Jewish Week. “What kind of book could I write that would reach that reader, who felt like he had read it all?” It was a question that Michaels asked herself repeatedly in the 10 years it took her to complete Fugitive Pieces (Knopf).

[Synamon]

Since the Holocaust was introduced at the start of the book, it was clearly central and not inserted to add drama to the story, so the use didn't bother me.

But I agree with sunsurfer that the author's perspective was detached, I mentioned the observer's voice in my earlier post. There was a disconnect between the writing style and the intensely personal way the Holocaust was experienced by Jacob. Was that intentional to provide friction and discomfit the reader, or just an artifact?

I was left wanting more access to Jacob, especially once other characters were introduced to the mix. Flashes of memory teased more than satisfied, so in the end the story felt incomplete.

[caleb72]

I can sometimes appreciate a distance from the topic. It can make the impact more profound.

I remember when reading Slaugherhouse Five, I thought it was quite effective that he almost trivialised events, it gave them more power in a way. But in the case of Fugitive Pieces, it seemed to be Ben's paraphrasing of Jacob's notes of a childhood he had actively tried to bury - the most traumatic of these occurring when he was quite young. It doesn't surprise me that it lacked a certain "personality".

Of course, Michaels chose the setting, the characters. Although the construction allows for the distance, you can still criticise the choice of building materials.

[Bookpossum]

Thanks for that article link sun surfer - good find.

Yes Synamon and caleb72, I know what you mean about the detachment. Perhaps it is a way of dealing with what is unimaginable horror. The detachment is a necessary protection, as it is for people who have to deal with horrors: for example, in the aftermath of of something like the plane crash in France. We need to shield our minds from the full dreadfulness in order to stay sane.

[fantasyfan]

The plot of Fugitive Pieces is very thin. Pages go by with very little happening so far as external incident is concerned. For that reason, I found that the best way for me to approach this novel was to concentrate on the powerful meditative sections that were a primary feature of the first part of the book. This section concentrated on the emotional growth of Jakob Beer. Throughout the story as he matures we have some beautiful insightful meditations on the nature of forgiveness, evil, loss, memory, language and dream.

For me the high point was the penultimate chapter of the Jakob section, "Terra Nullius". Here one wil read a powerful analysis of the relationship between victim and torturer. The latter dehumanises the victim and in so doing is dehumanised. Athos, who, in my opinion is the most vivid character in the book (not excepting Jakob himself) becomes an exemplar of humanity and wisdom. He

"... never confused objects and humans, who knew the difference between naming and the named."

Another fascinating character was Alex with her wonderful mercurial nature. I cannot help but feel that Jakob never properly appreciated her. I feel he married her for healing rather than love. Alex is far more interesting than the rather stereotyped Michaela. Introducing her after the magnificent "Terra Nullius" was a mistake as the answer she provides is simply an anticlimax.

Part II is, in my opinion, much weaker. The characters are less vivid, less interesting, and the entire section reads rather like an overlong coda on the main text. I think it adds little to the book. I must admit, however, that the author makes some clever and subtle connection between the two stories clearly atempting to show how two lives, separated in time, can interconnect on deeper psychological levels.

I think the novel is flawed but I also think that sections of it are very very fine indeed. I am very glad that I read it.