Tournament of Books discussion

thread to discuss We Cast a Shadow and it's inclusion in the play-in round.

Honestly, I was relieved to have it headed under 'the future is near' category because I couldn't put this one in a box when I started listening to it... satire? alternate history? real in some corner of the country?

Amy wrote: "thread to discuss We Cast a Shadow and it's inclusion in the play-in round.

Honestly, I was relieved to have it headed under 'the future is near' category because I couldn't put t..."

I'm reading this now. It's blink-and-you-miss hint to the near future. It's very unclear WHEN exactly but the main character, who I figure is at least 30, probably closer to 40, says his great grandfather was young in the 1950s. So it seemed it was 10-20 years from now? My guess anyway.

This was a unique and very interesting read. I can see why it's hard to compartmentalize it.

Amy wrote: "thread to discuss We Cast a Shadow and it's inclusion in the play-in round.

Honestly, I was relieved to have it headed under 'the future is near' category because I couldn't put t..."

You're right, it is difficult to label the type of novel this is. All of your suggestions make sense. Satire is very difficult to write in these times, which is strongly reflected here. I see that it has been shelved as "fiction," "science fiction," "race," and "contemporary" by Goodreads users. Not super helpful, and science fiction didn't come to my mind, but I guess I see it now.

C wrote: "Amy wrote: "thread to discuss We Cast a Shadow and it's inclusion in the play-in round.

Honestly, I was relieved to have it headed under 'the future is near' category because I co..."

I also enjoy the guesswork part of some novels, and I think your estimate of when this takes place makes sense. It was fun to realize that it is set in New Orleans (most reviews just mention "somewhere in the South") as I was visiting the city while listening to the book and there were various references pointing to NOLA as the setting. In Trust Exercise we figured out that it took place in Houston, and I wonder how authors make these decisions - should I be upfront about when and where this is taking place, or should I make the reader work for that? I think I enjoy the mystery, as long as there are enough clue for us to figure it out in places like this with our collective knowledge. ;)

Lauren wrote: "C wrote: "Amy wrote: "thread to discuss We Cast a Shadow and it's inclusion in the play-in round.

Honestly, I was relieved to have it headed under 'the future is near' category be..."

I think he wanted to call it The City to represent any city in America, but then he would give hints that it was around New Orleans. Or I already had that assumption because he lives in New Orleans... I think I would have liked it better if he just stuck with THE CITY.

Here's the review I wrote! Just finished this book.

My son was born with brain damage and his future is uncertain. I don't know what his disabilities will look like. Every day I live with an unendurable unknown, unable to visualize his future, or know what he will be capable of, if the world will hurt him and in what ways, how vulnerable he will be. A Black friend of mine told me that she understood what I was going through because she is the mother of two Black kids growing up in America. That really resonated with me. She said parenting for her is always unendurable unknowns and uncertainties, fear and anxieties about the future, and about what the world will do to her kids.
This book takes that desperation, that unendurable not knowing and agonizingly stretches it to three hundred pages.
I only gave it three stars because I didn't really like the writing very much.

Expanding a little bit more on the writing--I hesitate to criticize this book at all, as a white person...it doesn't really matter what I think. I think that's part of the point of the book. Why does it matter what I think of this book? But the writing felt too on the nose, too obvious. Each chapter jumped so much in time and space and plot and character that I found it hard to get into the flow. It felt disjointed and honestly not that funny to me. But the project of the book itself, what I wrote about above, stretching a parent's desperation over three hundred pages so that the reader would feel it too...that was really good writing. I don't know how I feel. Macro level, I thought it was a good book, but maybe not micro level. Then I wonder what the point of fiction is. Is it to have a project, to make a point?

Cat wrote: "Expanding a little bit more on the writing--I hesitate to criticize this book at all, as a white person...it doesn't really matter what I think. I think that's part of the point of the book. Why do..."

I understand your sentiments here. I also felt uneasy with some of the on-the-nose aspects of the writing. But I recognize the challenge of creating subtly around this subject and I don't think we've earned that as (white) readers. I'm very interested in reading more reviews from black readers to see how this worked for them. Unfortunately almost all of the ToB judges are white, so this will be difficult to navigate during the tournament.

And yes, finding the "point" of individual novels or fiction in general is always an interesting exercise. :)

Cat wrote: "Here's the review I wrote! Just finished this book.

My son was born with brain damage and his future is uncertain. I don't know what his disabilities will look like. Every day I live with an unend..."

Hugs to you and your mother friend, Cat. I can't imagine either of your situations but at the same time, I can see why he wrote this book. There is more I want to say about the book, but it's tough for me to explain myself at the moment, so I won't. I liked the book -- I stand by it.

I'm looking for some encouragement from those of you who have finished this... I trust your instincts for why this has been garnering so much praise in the literati.
I've been listening (a decent narration) and am up to the plantation visit but I'm having a difficult time continuing... if this is supposed to be speculative- future, then I want it to feel more plausible. If this is aiming for absurdity-as-satire then it's again failing because the elements that should be subtle are swapped with the elements that should be absurd. What are the effusive reviewers seeing that I'm missing?

Amy wrote: "I'm looking for some encouragement from those of you who have finished this... I trust your instincts for why this has been garnering so much praise in the literati.
I've been listening (a decent n..."

Amy, I took it as satire...painfully funny satire where, as a white person, I sometimes couldn't decide whether to laugh or cry and ended up doing both. It was a four-star read for me.

Amy wrote: "I'm looking for some encouragement from those of you who have finished this... I trust your instincts for why this has been garnering so much praise in the literati.
I've been listening (a decent n..."

I might not be able to convince you either way. I would say bail on it if it isn't for you. I liked the book but I can't say that I understood the book entirely... or if it's entirely possible to understand it? Sometimes it just seems bizarre. It's odd for me that the chapters would seem to end when the most action was happening... but then there would be little things that I know I would miss. For example, the obstetrician had the same name as the one from Rosemary's Baby that I happened to see shortly before reading the book. He might be making these small writerly choices I'm not picking up on. I might not be a smart enough reader for this. Some things were just too bizarre like the unity group and what they end up doing. I will admit that some satire has flown over my head in the past, but like you said, this could just be absurd.
I feel like he just liked the idea "what if a dad wanted to change the color of his son's skin" knowing full well there would be an emotional impact from the reader simply from the concept, no matter what he wrote? This book is not like The Sellout that had that awesome message that I understood and loved in the last few pages. I WILL be interested to see what he writes in the future though.

yeah, C this book is definitely suffering from my comparing it to The Sellout which I found at times difficult but overall funny and successful in its message.

I appreciate what Cat's saying above about putting us into the feeling of fear & desperation for a child who's lack of privilege is externally visible which I'm going to lean into a bit since I loved Fever Dream and this would be a sort of similar experience but that requires empathy for something I personally don't experience.

Amy I think this is a deeply uncomfortable read in every way. The experience of reading it reminded me of an audio copy I have of a Charles Bukowski reading. Bukowski spent the entire reading absolutely eviscerating the audience, telling them how bad they were, and they just kept laughing and clapping. I think this novel takes no quarter and leaves no safe territory for a white person to feel comfortable, or even to like it. It's so harsh. It made me laugh, and then I was horrified to find myself laughing. I think the best analog to my reading experience, the one that came closest for me of books I've read before, was Delicious Foods which I know you've also read.

Amy wrote: "yeah, C this book is definitely suffering from my comparing it to The Sellout which I found at times difficult but overall funny and successful in its message.

I appreciate what Ca..."

Yep, I completely agree that this is the point of the book: "putting us into the feeling of fear & desperation for a child who's lack of privilege is externally visible" which I wish was more of the focus, rather than the wackiness and the switcheroos that he was writing about. But obviously MORE of a focus on that would probably be too painful as it already is so painful. Without satire it might be unbearable.

Oh thanks Lark! That’s a good comparison for me

I recently finished this novel, and it was a very uncomfortable read for me too. However, I really liked the conflict set up by the author between making partner at a prestigious law firm (and thereby earning money to help a child) and completely debasing oneself. How much of one’s own humanity will one give up to help a child? I think this book is asking that question, and any parent is likely to respond “as much as it takes.“ as a parent myself, that would be my answer.

Having once worked at a (prestigious, Southern) law firm that shares a few too many similarities with the one depicted in this novel, I was immediately able to understand the protagonist’s plight. I saw several associates (often women or lawyers of color) make dubious decisions along the way to partnership, and I also saw the white, male associates receive extra attention. It was fairly sickening all around, and I’m glad to say I’ve left that world behind. This novel takes place in the future, but it hits uncomfortably close to home!

Reading this book was a chore. My complaint with it is not the message, but the delivery. It drug on and on and on. It felt like a George Saunders short story, but much less absurd, and much much longer.

Of all the play ins, I really hope this one doesn't make it.

This was one wild ride of a book. For a good part of the book I wasn't sure how I'd feel about it up against Golden State. I enjoyed the outlandishness of it, and even enjoyed most of the characters. The last 50ish pages though just didn't work for me. But I'm still thinking about it. But I'll be routing for Golden State in the play-in round.

More thoughts:
The blurb compares it to the Sellout (which I loved), but reading it felt more like the movies Get Out and Sorry to Bother You (which I also loved).

Over the top with what’s realistic and not, funny at times but also a very uncomfortable humor at times. Which is what good satire is supposed to be, right? If I think of it in relation to those movies it explains why it worked for me (until the end, which had the equivalent of the horse people at the end of Sorry to Bother You” but less effective.)

One random thing that annoyed me is I think I’m done with authors using “dear reader.” Surely there are new ways to speak to your readers? Silly annoyance.

It's sci-fi speculative satire that I think more closely resembles a dystopia...vaguely dystopic? I'm trying to remember all the sort of background details that are, as C said, blink-and-you-miss it. For instance:

Every black person is assigned a police officer to check in on them;
there is a registry (right? I'm not making that up am I?);

Roxane Gay called it a cautionary tale and I think that's horrifying and just perfect.

Bob wrote: Roxane Gay called it a cautionary tale and I think that's horrifying and just perfect."

That gave me a chill...Thinking too about the bracelets/ankle monitors some immigrants have to wear. Which fits in with the play-in round theme, “The Future Is Getting Here Awfully Fast.”

Golden State fits perfectly into that theme as well.

Bob wrote: "It's sci-fi speculative satire that I think more closely resembles a dystopia...vaguely dystopic? I'm trying to remember all the sort of background details that are, as C said, blink-and-you-miss i..."

I'm not sure if I remember it being every PERSON who gets a personal police check but it's definitely every black house and/or neighborhood gets the assigned police checks "for their own safety".

I spent most of my time reading thinking this was a bad book, but in the end I decided that it’s a great book that doesn’t much care if we read it or not, like it or not. The way it presents how American fear/hatred of Black people impacts the inner lives and families of those people was pretty hard to read (as it should be). I was certain I’d pull for Golden State, but have wholeheartedly changed my mind to Shadow for the play in round.

Heidi wrote: "I spent most of my time reading thinking this was a bad book, but in the end I decided that it’s a great book that doesn’t much care if we read it or not, like it or not..."

Exactly my take, Heidi.

Heidi wrote: "I was certain I’d pull for Golden State, but have wholeheartedly changed my mind to Shadow for the play in round...."

Yes, I liked Golden State a lot, but Shadow was the better book.

I just finished this yesterday and mostly found it powerful satire. I was confused by a couple “errors.” Did Noah take the tablets on the ark along with the animals? And did the narrator mean he had a sextant in his pack? Surely he didn’t have room for a sexton who wouldn’t have been much use in the woods. Where these errors or deliberate choices to show how clueless the narrator was? Or am I just being picky?