- Shopping Bag ( 0 items )
From the Trade Paperback edition.
Charles Baxter's brilliant first novel, First Light, is the only book I've read in adulthood that made me actually weep. It's the story of a stolid, stay-at-home brother and his passionate, globe-trotting sister, told in backwards chronology: Each chapter begins at a point in time soon before the previous chapter ends (thus, surprisingly and inevitably, ending with the birth of the little sister). The book's epigraph, tellingly, is from Kierkegaard: "Life can only be understood backwards, but it must be lived forwards."
Maybe it all sounds like one of those self-conscious gimmicks that British po-mo bad boys deploy in lieu of writing books with any real heart. (Four years after First Light, in fact, came Martin Amis's Time's Arrow, told in reverse chronology; to be charitable, it was not Amis's best book.) But heart is something Baxter has in abundance. Not only does he make the device work, he tells the story in a way that makes the structure seems utterly natural.
In real life, after all, falling in love does happen in reverse chronology. You learn the person's present, become enamored, and then, inexorably, come to learn about the past. That's First Light: You fall in love with the characters and then, now that you care, learn about their pasts.
And so it's with deep admiration for that novel, and for Baxter's short stories, that I now say this: His new novel, The Feast of Love, is his best work yet. It is to love in a midwestern town what The Things They Carried is to the burden of Vietnam.
Reviewers have often painted Baxter an earnest realist, perhaps because he is a midwesterner and writes about midwesterners (mostly Michiganders, which might be the most earnest proper noun in our language). What's special about Baxter's work, though, is how it's realistic on the surface, capturing the rhythms and longings of recognizable people—city managers, coffee shop owners, janitors, deaf children, aging teachers—but, right underneath, a mixture of classical storytelling devices and gentle but brainy postmodernism.
Take, for example, Baxter's most widely anthologized short story, "Gryphon" (collected in Through The Safety Net). It was inspired by Baxter's own experience teaching fourth grade in Michigan's bleak Saginaw Valley, which he did right out of college to get a deferment that kept him out of Vietnam. One day, Baxter found himself woefully unprepared for class and, on a whim, handled the lesson plan's edict to teach the students about ancient Egypt by making everything up. In the story, though, everything's told from the point of view of one of the kids, and the faux Egyptology is dispensed by an eccentric substitute teacher who also tells them that 6 times 11 is sometimes 68, that George Washington died because of a mistake about a diamond, and that she herself once traveled to Egypt and saw with her own eyes, in a cage, a half-bird, half-lion creature called a gryphon.
The story captures that (largely justified) feeling in childhood that everything you're learning in school is a big fat lie (most of what the sub tells them is strange but semifactual, like the one about "how Washington was not the first true president, but she didn't say who was"; technically, that would be Peyton Randolph, president of the first Continental Congress). Though the narrator's too young to intuit this, the story implies that the sub has just been dumped by some guy, which has left her distracted and without the time or sense of obligation necessary to prepare to teach a subject in which she is not trained.
But the story also has the zing of the fantastic (imagine Donald Barthelme in an unironic and superficially realistic mode) as well as the classical: not only because of the classical allusions but also because it is, after all, a stranger-comes-to-town story, one of two most basic tales. (As Eudora Welty once remarked, there are only two basic stories: Somebody leaves or a stranger comes to town. Everything is either one or the other or a combination thereof. Think about it: the Old Testament—somebody leaves. The New Testament—a stranger comes to town. Etc.)
When Baxter set out to write fiction, he was deeply influenced by his wide, wildly diverse reading in philosophy, criticism, and world literature (particularly Lars Gustafsson's Stories of Happy People and Robert Musil's 1,774-page The Man Without Qualities). His first three (unpublished) novels were in the Barth/Barthelme mode, and his earliest published stories came when he took those novels and boiled each down to its 15-page essence. His subsequent novels have quite consciously been composed not of one continuous narrative but rather story-sized units from different perspectives. Although in interviews Baxter has been self-deprecating about this, saying he's done it out of his own failures, he's very much taught himself to turn that failure into his advantage.
First Light, again realistic on its surface, shows in its structure Baxter's continued interest in the intellectual complexities of story, but The Feast of Love is the best synthesis of everything that's preoccupied Baxter as a writer, and everything he has heretofore done well.
The book is foursquare about happy love, even if the shelf life of that happiness is mournfully finite. On the surface, it's an engrossing, engaging collection of intersecting first-person monologues. The two main characters are Bradley Smith, twice-divorced owner of a coffee shop at the mall, and Chloé, one of his much-pierced teenaged employees, who is besotted with love for Oscar, another coffee shop clerk. In addition, Baxter creates amazingly convincing portraits of Bradley's ex-wives and of their lovers and of his next-door neighbor, a 60-something professor of Kierkegaardian philosophy at the University of Michigan.
All of this is drawn together by a character named Charlie Baxter, who both is and mostly isn't the writer, the same way that the Tim O'Brien in The Things They Carried both is but mostly isn't Tim O'Brien the actual person (who was, actually, the student government president at Macalester College the same time Baxter was the editor of the literary magazine).
It's a device for our times, a way of acknowledging and skewering the culture's appalling habit of reading fiction merely to decode it for autobiography. The Charlie Baxter of the novel is, like the author, a professor at the University of Michigan. He lives on the author's street and shares the author's problem with insomnia. Oscar and Chloé plan to kick off their honeymoon by going to see a band called the School of Velocity; the author's son plays in a band by the same name, and the author writes lyrics for the band's songs.
None of which helps the reader better understand the novel, or is of more than voyeuristic interest, but which allows Baxter to use a storytelling device that is at once ancient (think of how Chaucer shapes The Canterbury Tales) and postmodern (unreliable narrator, direct address of the reader, moving a story forward with the spaces and gaps withing the story), all to create a novel that is 100 percent Charles Baxter.
--Mark Winegardner
Mark Winegardner, a professor in the creative writing program at Florida State University, is the author of four books, including the novelThe Veracruz Blues.
From the Trade Paperback edition.
Question: As the book opens, the character Charles Baxter leaves his house for a walk in the middle of the night. As he passes an antique mirror at the foot of the stairs, he describes the mirror as "e;glimmerless,"e; a word he has used to describe himself [p. 4]. What does he mean by this? At the end of the novel, as dawn arrives, he tells us that "e;all the voices have died out in my head. I've been emptied out. . . . My glimmerlessness has abated, it seems, at least for the moment"e; [p. 307]. What is the real Charles Baxter suggesting about the role of the author in The Feast of Love?
Question: Does Baxter's decision to give the job of narration over to the characters themselves create a stronger sense of realism in the novel? Does it offer a greater possibility for revelation from the characters? What is the effect of this narrative technique on the reading experience?
Question: Does Bradley become more interesting as the novel unfolds? Kathryn says of him, "e;He turned himself into the greatest abstraction"e; [p. 34]. His neighbor Harry Ginsberg says, "e;He seemed to be living far down inside himself, perhaps in a secret passageway connected to his heart"e; [p. 75], while Diana says, "e;What a midwesterner he was, a thoroughly unhip guy with his heart in the usual place, on the sleeve, in plain sight. He was uninteresting and genuine, sweet-tempered and dependable, the sort of man who will stabilize your pulse rather than make it race"e; [p. 140]. Which, if any, of these insights is closest to the truth?
Question: The novel takes its title from a beautiful, light-filled painting that Bradley has made and hidden in his basement. When Esther Ginsberg asks him why there are no people in the painting, Bradley answers, "e;Because . . . no one's ever allowed to go there. You can see it but you can't reach it"e; [p. 81]. Does the fact that Bradley has been able to paint such a powerful image suggest that he is closer to attaining it than he thinks?
Question: Why does Chlo? go to see Mrs. Maggaroulian, the psychic? Is the fortune-teller's presence in the novel related to Harry Ginsberg's belief that "e;the unexpected is always upon us"e; [pp. 290, 302]? How might this belief change the way one chooses to live?
Question: What are Diana's motivations for marrying Bradley? Does her reasoning process [p. 138] seem plausible, or is it the result of desperation and self-deception? Is Diana, at the outset, the least likable character in the novel? How does she manage to work her way into the reader's affections?
Question: Bradley is a person who baffles himself. He says, "e;I need a detective who could snoop around in my life and then tell me the solution to the mystery that I have yet to define, and the crime that created it"e; [p. 106]. Why, if his first wife Kathryn has a profound fear of dogs, does he take her to visit a dog pound? Why, if his second wife Diana is afraid of open spaces, does he take her to the wide skies and watery horizons of Michigan's Upper Peninsula? Why does he often act in ways that will compromise his happiness? Is Bradley like most people in this unfortunate tendency?
Question: The characters often define themselves in strikingly economical statements. For instance, Diana says, "e;I lack usable tenderness and I don't have a shred of kindness, but I'm not a villain and never have been"e; [p. 258]; and Bradley says, "e;My inner life lacks dignity"e; [p. 58]. Do the characters in this novel display an unusual degree of insight and self-knowledge? Are some more perceptive about themselves than others?
Question: In his description of the shopping mall in which Jitters is located, Bradley remarks, "e;The ion content in the oxygen has been tampered with by people trying to save money by giving you less oxygen to breathe. You get light-headed and desperate to shop. . . . Don't get me wrong: I believe in business and profit"e; [p. 110]. In what ways is Bradley not a typical businessman? How does Jitters differ from a caf? such as Starbucks? What observations does the novel make about America's consumer-driven culture?
Question: Throughout literature (for example, in Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet), the traditional boy-meets-girl plot is complicated by the presence of a father or parents who refuse to sanction the union of the lovers. Can Oscar's father be seen in this traditional role—as a potential threat to the happiness of Chlo? and Oscar? Or does he represent something far more threatening and evil? What is his effect on the latter part of the novel?
Question: Harry Ginsberg tells Bradley about a poem his mother used to recite, about a dragon with a rubber nose. "e;This dragon would erase all the signs in town at night. During the day, no one would know where to go or what to buy. No signs anywhere. Posters gone, information gone. . . . A world without signs of any kind. . . . Very curious. I often think about that poem"e; [p. 88]. Bradley takes up the idea, and begins to draw pictures of the dragon. How does the parable of the dragon resonate with some of the larger questions and ideas in the novel?
Question: Speaking of Oscar, Chlo? says, "e;Words violate him. And me, Chlo?, I'm even more that way. There's almost no point in me saying anything about myself because the words will all be inhuman and brutally inaccurate. So no matter what I say, there's no profit in it"e; [p. 63]. Does Chlo? underestimate her own talent for self-expression? Do her sections of the narrative belie her opinion about the uselessness of words?
Question: How would you characterize Chlo?'s unique brand of intelligence? What are her strengths as a person? Is it likely that she will survive the loss of Oscar, and the challenge of single parenting, without any diminishment of her spirit?
Question: Chlo? believes that she once saw Jesus at a party; she also believes in karma and similar forms of spiritual justice. Harry Ginsberg, a scholar of the Danish philosopher Kierkegaard, remarks, "e;The problem with love and God . . . is how to say anything about them that doesn't annihilate them instantly with wrong words, with untruth. . . . We feel both, but because we cannot speak clearly about them, we end up—wordless, inarticulate—by denying their existence altogether, and pfffffft, they die"e; [p. 77]. Why do questions of spirituality and the meaning of human existence play such a major role in The Feast of Love?
Question: In The Feast of Love, is sex an accurate gauge of the state of two people's emotional relationship to each other? If sex is an expression of Chlo? and Oscar's joy in each other, does it make sense that they attempt to use it to make some sorely needed money? Is it puritanical to assume that they are making a mistake? Why are they ill suited for the pornography business?
Question: Based on what happens in The Feast of Love, would you assume that the author believes that love is necessary for happiness? Although they begin the novel mismatched, Bradley, Kathryn, and Diana eventually all find themselves with the partners they truly desire. Is it surprising that the novel offers so many happy endings? How does the tragedy of Oscar's death fit in with the better fortunes of the other characters? Why has Baxter chosen to quote Prokofiev [p. 237] to open the section called "e;Ends"e;?
Anonymous
Posted August 26, 2011
By far my favorite read. Purely beautiful story.
Was this review helpful? Yes NoThank you for your feedback. Report this reviewThank you, this review has been flagged.8096914
Posted May 3, 2011
Couldnt put this book down
Was this review helpful? Yes NoThank you for your feedback. Report this reviewThank you, this review has been flagged.EMM31
Posted February 16, 2009
Charles Baxter compiles characters that are real and a story that flows.
Was this review helpful? Yes NoThank you for your feedback. Report this reviewThank you, this review has been flagged.Anonymous
Posted July 1, 2008
This is the first Charles Baxter novel I have ever read and I simply loved it. The characters are living, breathing people that, like us all are living, loving and are interconnected in a way that is entertaining as well as poignant. I highly recommend.
Was this review helpful? Yes NoThank you for your feedback. Report this reviewThank you, this review has been flagged.Anonymous
Posted June 15, 2008
I am currently deployed and my best friend sends me random books to read. At first when I got it in the mail I was half tempted to throw the book to the side and just watch the movie. I am glad I didn't. Once I started reading the book, I couldn¿t put it down. When I was finished with it, I watched the movie and I am just going to say, the movie does NOT compare to the book. Chloe and Oscar are amazing in the book you feel like you know them and want the love that they share together. In the movie their meeting and other life changing events weren¿t so emotional because of that! I highly recommend the book. I did not think the movie was worth watching once I read it.
Was this review helpful? Yes NoThank you for your feedback. Report this reviewThank you, this review has been flagged.Anonymous
Posted December 21, 2006
It was my first Baxter book and completely adored it! The Feast of Love tops my favorite book list. Though it took a while for me to get into it, I became addicted. The book is a thinker and makes you say 'oooh.' I loved his style, the humor and the sadness. I bought my second Baxter book, Saul and Patsy.
Was this review helpful? Yes NoThank you for your feedback. Report this reviewThank you, this review has been flagged.Anonymous
Posted November 26, 2006
I listened to this book and audio and found it to be very enjoyable. The readers did an excellent job with the story and the story had some great insights into love and relationships
Was this review helpful? Yes NoThank you for your feedback. Report this reviewThank you, this review has been flagged.Anonymous
Posted August 9, 2003
This book is one of the best books I have read! Very Poignant and deep. This book makes you want to highlight parts of it because it is indeed very poetic and very moving to say the least. Just like a puzzle each piece is relevant and the whole picture comes together at the end. Not a love story, but a story about love, change and hope.
Was this review helpful? Yes NoThank you for your feedback. Report this reviewThank you, this review has been flagged.Anonymous
Posted January 13, 2003
Charles Baxter develops his characters into full & complex individuals by letting them tell their own stories. Reliable or unreliable, these narrators spin their tales like a Greek chorus, giving us fragments at a time that spin ultimately into a beautiful whole. Highly recommended.
Was this review helpful? Yes NoThank you for your feedback. Report this reviewThank you, this review has been flagged.Anonymous
Posted September 24, 2002
I randomly picked out this book at the JFK airport about two years ago before a long flight. And I still remember every page in that book. Baxter has a great writing style and it's easy to read. I really enjoyed this book and highly recommend it to others.
Was this review helpful? Yes NoThank you for your feedback. Report this reviewThank you, this review has been flagged.Anonymous
Posted August 27, 2002
This book was a wonderful book to come across. I found it just when I was getting frustrated with all the bad books that I have read lately. This work stood out for its originality when so many books are beginning to seem the same. I look forward to reading more of his work.
Was this review helpful? Yes NoThank you for your feedback. Report this reviewThank you, this review has been flagged.Anonymous
Posted July 2, 2002
Since every review of this book has gotten a five (and only a handful of books should actually get a five, especially when combined with multiple reviews) I feel compelled to write a little blurb here which avoids the 'just read it and I love it!' mentality that so often enraptures us in the post-finish weeks. I will admit, The Feast of Love kept my interest, even though I am not partial to love or romance books. Mostly a fan of satire/war/dark novels, I found myself enjoying this book more than I had anticipated (it was recommended by a former girlfriend). But, where the story fails is in its ability to move along the story without falling into cliched sentiment. Some of the little stories of 'love' work well, while others seem like so many stories recycled again and again, with no real face or heart. The strongest character in the book is Chloe, a young teenager on the verge of a new love with a fitting boy. Although sometimes stereotyped way too much (type of dress, hair color, etc.) Chloe is able to develop a unique voice that doesn't seem like cheap sentiment or false sorrow. She seems to have been a side character that Baxter simply couldn't ignore, and she really ran with the book. Bradley, the main character through most of story, is also unique, but melancholy and sappy in ways that make him seem less interesting than others. His trials with love are often entertaining, but he reaches for it with such desperation that we lose touch with him. The older couple in the novel are also a bit glum and if you haven't lost a child to drugs or hatred, it is very difficult to connect with them. They seem more like story-movers than actual people, and their lives seem better left from the story. Other than these things, and the fact that every character referring to Bradley as 'toad' is simply annoying, the book seems to achieve its purpose. One of the best parts of the story is when Bradley goes to retrieve his dog (also named Bradley) from his sister and brother-in-law, who have sort of taken him hostage. Bradley gives his little nephew money in exchange for his silence, which causes the scene to appear as bribery. The book's best message comes near the end, when the Bradley character is beginning a new love. He has a short chapter in which he gives no stories, because he states that when we are in love, we have no stories to tell. All stories are of heartbreak and woe, and in the good times, we must sit back and enjoy, living fully for the moment. Amen.
Was this review helpful? Yes NoThank you for your feedback. Report this reviewThank you, this review has been flagged.Anonymous
Posted May 7, 2002
I wandered into my local bookshop, read the back of this book, and took it home without any real expectations. One week later, I had finished the book and was heart-broken and awe-struck. It's marvelous. Beautifully written and masterfully constructed, it left a lasting impression on me. I can't recommend it enough.
Was this review helpful? Yes NoThank you for your feedback. Report this reviewThank you, this review has been flagged.Anonymous
Posted January 12, 2002
i looooooooooved this book. it was so fantastic in describing the lives of everyone around this man, bradley, in a way that left me speechless, knowing i will never forget them.
Was this review helpful? Yes NoThank you for your feedback. Report this reviewThank you, this review has been flagged.Anonymous
Posted July 29, 2001
Charles Baxter has created a wonderful tale in which he seemlessly weaves the lives of almost a dozen people together to make one intricate journey into the dimensions and facets of love.
Was this review helpful? Yes NoThank you for your feedback. Report this reviewThank you, this review has been flagged.Anonymous
Posted July 28, 2001
When you have to stop reading to think to yourself 'God himself could not have written and more eloquent sentence than that one...' at countless points during the consumption of a novel, you know without a doubt that you are in the presence of greatness. Brutally truthful in style and substance, I can not express, within the confines of the english language, the depth of admiration I feel for both this book and it's author. I beg you to read it... no, DEVOUR it - you owe it to yourself!
Was this review helpful? Yes NoThank you for your feedback. Report this reviewThank you, this review has been flagged.Anonymous
Posted May 7, 2001
This book nearly tore my heart out by the end, but in the best way.
Was this review helpful? Yes NoThank you for your feedback. Report this reviewThank you, this review has been flagged.Anonymous
Posted October 13, 2000
I absolutely adored this book. I go through so many novels that I do not enjoy at all, or novels that do not really speak to me, but this one is just the opposite. I loved the stories, and read several chapters out loud to people I love. The novel has a message which we always hear, but it is told in such a poignant and beautiful way. Highly recommended.
Was this review helpful? Yes NoThank you for your feedback. Report this reviewThank you, this review has been flagged.Anonymous
Posted May 31, 2000
..and it's not necessarily what really happened, at least according to the other participants. The characters are finely draw, honest and interesting even when distasteful and unappealling in their habits. The part about the psychic in Ypsilanti is too funny - you want to read it out loud to a friend. The last chapter I have read several times. Life is sad, funny, passionate and full of missteps- but our time here is short - we should appreciate it.
Was this review helpful? Yes NoThank you for your feedback. Report this reviewThank you, this review has been flagged.Anonymous
Posted May 30, 2000
Never has a book kept me up all night. Feast of Love is a rare look at the passion behind what really makes a relationship work. The way you are able to relate to there struggles and emotion is nothing short of outstanding. Highly charged. A must for any avid reader.
Was this review helpful? Yes NoThank you for your feedback. Report this reviewThank you, this review has been flagged.
Overview
From "one of our most gifted writers" (Chicago Tribune), here is a superb new novel that delicately unearths the myriad manifestations of extraordinary love between ordinary people.The Feast of Love is just that -- a sumptuous work of fiction about the thing that most distracts and delights us. In a re-imagined Midsummer Night's Dream, men and women speak of and desire their ideal mates; parents seek out their lost children; adult children try to come to terms with their own parents and, in some cases, find new ones.
In vignettes both comic and sexy, the owner of a coffee shop ...