Trust Exercise

I never ever ever ever would have finished this book if it weren't for book club, because I hated (hated!) (HATED!) Part 1 of the book. Part 2 rocked and actually actively made up for Part 1. This is literally exactly the type of book that a lot of normal people hate but that wins literary awards and gets glowing reviews calling it audacious and spellbinding, etc., but don't let that stop you from giving it a shot.

It's been some days since I finished this book and I still keep discovering new ways in which it is meta.

The narrative about-face in the second part of the book is a neat trick, of the sort that makes you want to immediately reread the story, this time questioning everything.

I really appreciated the style too - it seemed like the author wasn't trying very hard, and only towards the end when they identity of the narrator is once again thrown into question did this make all the more sense to me.

I've seen this called an experimental novel. It starts out as a story about a group of teenagers at a performing arts high school in an unnamed southern American city, their relationships, and their charismatic but shady teacher, Mr. Kingsley. Midway through, the story shifts dramatically, bringing some of the same characters into adulthood, but also bringing many of your initial assumptions into question and introducing (for me, anyway) a strong element of scepticism. Once the attitude of scepticism is invoked, it persists through the third part, even though the story told in the third part seems to corroborate what we learned in the second part. If that makes sense.

In the high school section of the novel, the students are asked to perform “trust exercises” with each other: falling backwards into a crowd of their fellow students, crawling around in the dark and identifying each other by feel (!!), etc. They also perform “mirroring” exercises, where one person says a “you” statement to another, and the second student repeats the statement as an “I” statement, using tone and inflection to change the meaning of the statement each time. These exercises result in changes of relationship between the students, but they also reappear later in the story as themes. Trustworthiness, the ability (or failure) to communicate effectively, the (lack of) ability to hear or interpret what someone is saying, and self absorption are all themes in the novel.

Each section of the novel is readable, even if you don't particularly like any of the characters. There's a lot of cringeworthy sex, but you understand that it is cringeworthy for a reason. The transitions between sections are abrupt and therefore jarring–there just isn't any continuity to smooth them out. Having finished the novel, I can contemplate the whole and feel satisfied that it IS a complete whole, although it felt disjointed while I was in the process.

One sentence synopsis... Written in three parts (with each new part upending the “reality” of the former) this experimental novel examines forms of trust - between students and teachers, lovers, parents and children, but especially the delicate trust required for readers to suspend their disbelief and let an author take them through a story. .

Read it if you like... the first part of this book is reminiscent of a poor man's Sally Rooney (which we later realize has been written poorly on purpose) but the twist is for fans of books that make the readers a participant in the story (think ‘Ship of Theseus' by JJ Abrams). .

Dream casting... I pictured Peter Gallagher as the charismatic theatre teacher Mr. Kingsley/Robert Lord (apologies to Sandy Cohen).