Tournament of Books discussion

this thread to discuss (and rehash) Trust Exercise by Susan Choi which won the National Booker Prize this year

That was... interesting. I liked how it plays with expectations, but Karen's narration during part 2 really bugged me.

Kyle wrote: "That was... interesting. I liked how it plays with expectations, but Karen's narration during part 2 really bugged me."

Can you expostulate on why? It seems like most readers are relieved when Karen's narration starts because Sarah's story was so icky. I felt the relief too but did not entirely trust Karen's version of things either. Did you believe everything in part 2?

For one, I felt that Karen's digressions on etymology and her psychology seemed to interrupt whatever narrative momentum her section had.

there's also the fact that both Claire and Karen's sections have discrepancies (such as their depiction of the teacher) and while I understand this was intentional, the only account that was clearly "fictionalized" was Sarah's. Who, then, do we believe?

I feel like we discussed this one pretty thoroughly during Camp ToB, but hopefully the judges can bring in some new perspectives. I wasn't a fan, and don't really want to see this book beating out others in the tournament, but I'm open to learning about new reasons I should have appreciated it more, haha.

Same here. I was lurking during Camp ToB, but am still hopeful there will be something new that makes it more appealing.

I read it during the camp and didn't like it so I was a bit disappointed to see it on the shortlist, I would read something else by Susan Choi though

Kyle, I agree with you that it's hard to know what to believe, but I ended up thinking that maybe that was part of the point: that we as a society get very fixated on knowing all the prurient, horrific details and What Is the Objective Truth when something awful happens, but maybe the objective truth is unknowable and less important than how people were affected and what their individual truths are.

Irene, I may not be the best person to give recs because I think I liked Trust Exercise more than you did, but if you want to give Susan Choi another go, I really loved My Education.

thanks for the recommendation Natalie

I agree that that is part of the point, but i feel like she should have either driven it a bit further or made it completely clear at the end, it felt a bit halfway for me.

As someone who has taken acting classes and has trod the boards, I found Part One intriguing. As someone who loves metafiction, I'm finding Part Two fascinating. Not finished yet though.

Finished. I thought it was brilliant. It kept me off-balance. Made me uneasy. Made me want to reread it in the same way that did.

Kyle wrote: "Claire and Karen's sections have discrepancies (such as their depiction of the teacher) and while I understand this was intentional, the only account that was clearly "fictionalized" was Sarah's. Who, then, do we believe?"

My take was that "Karen" didn't use the real names of herself and the other characters, but referred to them by the names of their fictional counterparts in "Sarah's" book.

"Karen" hinted that "Sarah" was more wronged by "Mr. Kingsley" than "David" was. "Sarah's" book implied that "David" was abused sexually by "Kingsley" after "Manuel" left. I think it's possible that "Sarah" distanced herself from her own abuse at the hands of "Kingsley" by having his fictional counterpart prey on boys rather than girls. "Liam" could have been a stand-in for "Kingsley", who may have taken advantage of the rebound factor when "Sarah" and "David" broke up.

"Jim Kingsley" was, of course, Robert Lord.

Claire could have been the child of either "Karen" and "Martin", "Karen" and "Kingsley", or "Sarah" and "Kingsley".

Perhaps Lord knew exactly who Claire's birth mother was, if Velva could see the resemblance so clearly.

A lot of things to think about. Certainly there's a lot about predatory men, but even more interesting I think is the idea that what we call fiction is often truth remixed.

Eric wrote: "Kyle wrote: "Claire and Karen's sections have discrepancies (such as their depiction of the teacher) and while I understand this was intentional, the only account that was clearly "fictionalized" w..."

I think this captures one of my biggest frustrations with the book at the end. The confusion with who was who was fairly overwhelming (especially with the audio version) and I didn't find that it added enough to the story to be worth it. I'm all for readers needing to work to get the full beauty of literary fiction, but this felt like too much for too little.

This is definitely a polarizing read. I enjoyed this book. Sarah’s story made me feel like it was a YA book that was written on watt pad. Then Karen comes in. It was so clever that the first part is actually “written” by Sarah and it’s her author debut. You can not truly believe what Karen is saying because there is so many discrepancies from Sarah’s POV. The book is called Trust Exercises, yet it seems that you really can not trust anyone 100 percent. I feel like there is always one book that the TOB picks that readers either loved or hated to spark a conversation. I just read The Accidental last year for the winners TOB. Trust Exercises reminds me of the same type of premise as The Accidental. Unreliable characters, the reader doesn’t know who to believe, and none of the characters have redeeming qualities. I must love weird books.

Kristina wrote: "This is definitely a polarizing read. I enjoyed this book. Sarah’s story made me feel like it was a YA book that was written on watt pad. Then Karen comes in. It was so clever that the first part i..."

I trusted The Accidental's maid but we don't hear enough from her. haha

I don’t think I have anything unique or interesting to add to this conversation, except that I find myself confused about what happened in this book, or what the point of it all was. I want to clarify that this is not necessarily a complaint.

I wonder if anyone had thoughts about the shifting voice in the “Karen” section between first and third person, which I found unsettling and almost sloppy. Was there a pattern or purpose?

As a theatre professional and metafiction-lover, I was primed to love this, but perhaps it will only reveal itself upon reflection.

I just finished this one a couple days ago and it still is right there at the forefront of my brain. I found it quite fascinating even if, yes, there are some dangling threads in terms of who is who and who hurt who.

I took it as a representation of how we disassociate as a result of trauma — trauma of all kinds, that is. “Karen” is traumatized by the betrayal of her good friend (and honestly? I got the feeling that Sarah had ‘stolen’ the story of Karen’s sexual assault and turned it into that famously icky Liam scene. What a horrendous and specific way to betray a friend!), she is traumatized by the heinous behavior of Martin (who is a fictional stand in for Kingsley???), and she is traumatized deeply by her pregnancy. She’s so shaken by her whole life that she never once uses her real name. I found that very powerful, and I also took all of her 3rd/1st person shifts in that same stride; when something so awful happens to you so young, no wonder you can’t (for lack of a more precise term) get a grip on yourself.

I actually enjoyed Sarah’s part of the novel as well. The sticky angst, and the particular heightened/performative emotions of a special THEATRE program rang both very true and very much what it would feel like in retrospect/nostalgia. And I didn’t even go to school! (I was homeschooled right up till college. I know, I know.)

The final chapter really brought it all together imo. Finding out that beloved, flaming Kingsley was actually the predatory monster Lord (WHO IS ASSAULTING HIS OWN FUCKING DAUGHTER?????) really solidified all the themes of disassociation for me.

Perhaps I’m reading things that aren’t there, but either way, the novel gave me a queasy, brilliant feel that impressed me to no end. It reminded me of things and assaults I try to forget all the time, and specifically it reminded me of all the ridiculous ways your mind pretzels itself trying to escape. I loved it.

I read this during Camp TOB, so my thoughts and impressions aren’t particularly fresh or distinct anymore. That said, the excellent commentary here has reminded me of a few things. First, I love Eric’s comment that “what we call fiction is often truth remixed.” I think this novel is examining this concept in depth and trying to throw its readers off balance. We can’t be entirely sure what is supposed to be “true” in the world of the novel or what is fiction. I’m left wondering how much it actually matters. The larger themes might be the same (for example, the subjectivity of human experience arising from different perspectives and experiences) even if we’re not exactly sure about the truth of the events.

Second, Aaron’s point about the lengths a human mind will go to disassociate/protect itself from trauma is interesting to consider. I know we all know this happens, but Choi shows it unfolding on the page in an interesting and credible way. As readers, we’re going along for the ride, and it’s a fascinating journey.

Finally, I love that this book is set in Houston (my home town and current town) except I really wish the book had “owned” that fact more obviously. Houston is a remarkable city that deserves to get some positive attention every now and then.

Aaron wrote: "I just finished this one a couple days ago and it still is right there at the forefront of my brain. I found it quite fascinating even if, yes, there are some dangling threads in terms of who is wh..."

I agree with you. I read this over the summer and the story has stuck with me. I do think this book is about trauma and the ways women deal with it. I believe both Sarah and Karen were assaulted in high school, and each took a different path. Sarah handles her trauma by writing a fictional account about it where the student assaulted is not her or her friend Karen but a male student. Her therapy is writing, and she is able to get over her high school years to have a writing career and get pregnant. Karen, on the other hand, is unable to get over what all went down. She never moves away, becomes indispensable to David as a way to keep in contact with people from that time in her life, and then uses David to get her revenge. She practically wallows in her trauma.

Amanda wrote: "Aaron wrote: "I just finished this one a couple days ago and it still is right there at the forefront of my brain. I found it quite fascinating even if, yes, there are some dangling threads in term..."
This book has really stuck with me too. This one and Fleishman are the two books that keep niggling at me because I can't get a fix on them. I don't believe fully either Sarah or Karen's version of events but I do believe they were both abused by adults who took advantage of them. For me the title also pertains to the reader. As the reader, I am being asked to trust that the trauma is there and the abuse happened, even if I know that the details of the version given to me are not 100% accurate.

Ruthiella wrote: " For me the title also pertains to the reader. As the reader, I am being asked to trust that the trauma is there and the abuse happened, even if I know that the details of the version given to me are not 100% accurate ..."

oooh! nice!

I finally read this book and I’m so so irritable about it. Thank you everyone for the comments above. One question I have left is: huh? Or to use more words, is there a credible through line in this novel? The last section throws me. Claire seems to think Mr Lord/Mr Kingsley is possibly her father? Why see him in particular, if not? Is the through line that Karen and Sarah both were molested and both had babies, one by Martin and one by Kingsley, and kept them secret from each other? The molestation of Claire seems so grotesque and out of sync with the idea of Kingsley as this highly charismatic teacher.

I guess maybe it’s a book about abuse being unknowable? If so it succeeds in keeping me in the dark.