Salon Reading Club
Cronin’s “The Passage”: Death after the apocalypse
A reader chimes in on Salon's first Reading Club selection: What does mortality mean at the end of the world?
For me, two big questions are raised by this section of the novel. What is time? What is death?
Of time, Grey realizes that:
“He’d thought it was one thing but it was actually another. It wasn’t a line but a circle, and even more; it was a circle made of circles made of circles, each lying on top of the other, so that every moment was next to every other moment, all at once.” (Chapter Thirteen)
As I read, I find myself wondering about this idea of time in terms of plot and its implication for the clairvoyance some characters seem to possess. But mostly, I see this passage as a kind of blueprint for reading the novel with its many characters and story lines.
It is not surprising that death would be ubiquitous in an apocalyptic novel but Cronin compellingly blends ordinary death with the extraordinary. Wolgast discovers a primal knowledge of death: “To die, his body told him. To die. That is why we live, to die” (Chapter 17). Carter’s last fully human thought is his realization that “it is good to die,” an epiphany so strong that “when he thought this, for a second he was Anthony again. It was good to die. There was a lightness in it, a letting go, like love” (Chapter Twelve). Clearly, the message is that it is human to die and death gives us our humanity.
And yet: Several characters have been devastated by the very ordinary deaths of key people in their lives. Jeanette’s father’s death begins the “long series of mistakes” which culminate in her abandonment of Amy and Mrs. Woods desire to end it all effectively takes Carter with her (Chapter Twelve). Wolgast is himself destroyed by the death of his daughter, and Lear persists with his dangerous ‘research’ because the death of his wife has left him with nothing left to lose. Death may be vital to our humanity but each ordinary death brings its own mini ‘apocalypse’ to those closest to it.
Reading Club interview: Jonathan Franzen answers your questions
The "Freedom" author discusses "Franzenfreude," Obama's reading choice and the criticism that really hits home
Jonathan Franzen As you know, we really liked Jonathan Franzen’s “Freedom.” Over the past month, as part of the second edition of the Salon Reading Club, Laura Miller and Salon readers have been discussing everything about the book, from the characters we loved — or loved to hate — to our favorite sentences or the most memorable moments. Over the past month, we’ve also collected your questions for Jonathan Franzen (in the letters section and via e-mail) about everything from the “Franzenfreude” backlash to his own personal writing process.
Continue Reading CloseWhy Jonathan Franzen is the wrong face for “Franzenfreude”
Yes, white male writers are too dominant in highbrow literature, but the "Freedom" author is one of the good guys
Having finally released three books back into the wild of the Brooklyn Public Library system — “Freedom,” “Catching Fire” and “The Passage” — I feel the time is right to weigh in on the literary meme of the moment, “Franzenfreude,” a term that, loosely defined, indicates that author Jonathan Franzen represents all that is wrong with the contemporary highbrow book world.
Is that stupid? Quite! Except there’s a caveat. The phenomenon referred to by “Franzenfreude” — the idea that the highbrow book world reserves its highest praise and most fawning attention for the works of men — is absolutely true. It just happens that Jonathan Franzen is a terrible poster boy for that problem.
Continue Reading CloseEster Bloom's writing has appeared in the Apple Valley Review, Conte: A Journal of Narrative Poetry, The Morning News, PANK, Bundle, Nerve.com, and Salon.com, and is collected on her website, esterbloom.com. She is currently at work on a book of comic essays entitled "Never Marry a Short Woman." More Ester Bloom.
“Freedom”: Which character is Jonathan Franzen?
Richard isn't a stand-in for the author, but the character's irresistible negativity is what makes the novel work
“There had always been something not quite right about the Berglunds.” This is the general consensus among the Berglunds’ former neighbors when, long after they’ve moved, Walter Berglunds’ name suddenly resurfaces in an unfavorable New York Times feature. “Freedom” is Jonathan Franzen’s 500-page exploration of just what that “not quite right” something is; and how it is that Walter went from left-wing ideologue “greener than Greenpeace” to lackey for a West Virginia coal mining company and figure of national media contempt.
Continue Reading CloseRoad trips, political rage and catnapping
The Salon Reading Club concludes its discussion of Jonathan Franzen's "Freedom"
Welcome to the third and final session of the Salon Reading Club for Jonathan Franzen’s novel “Freedom.” Last week, we took the discussion up through Page 382, and now it’s time to consider the book’s conclusion. If you haven’t finished yet and are spoiler phobic, read no further. (See the sidebar to the right for more information on the Salon Reading Club)
As always, I’ll toss a few topics out in this introduction, but please feel free to take the conversation wherever you like in the comments. Now’s your last chance to get in any questions you may have for Jonathan Franzen. He’ll being answering them next week.
Continue Reading Close
Laura Miller is a senior writer for Salon. She is the author of "The Magician's Book: A Skeptic's Adventures in Narnia" and has a Web site, magiciansbook.com. More Laura Miller.
Reading Club: America’s prudish literary morality
Why are so many writers, including Jonathan Franzen, so obsessed with creating "likable" characters?
Likability is indeed just another word for “morality.” A huge section of the American reading public does not want art for art’s sake, or even realistic characters; it wants the books we read and the movies we see to be clever public service announcements, meant to uphold public morality.
Naturally, these unrealistic modern Achilles types must have some “likable” flaw, which is almost worse. It leads to the aesthetic of “quirkiness,” which has brought such success to Jonathan Safran Foer and Wes Anderson (probably the two masters of the modern safe-quirk genre).
Continue Reading ClosePage 1 of 4 in Salon Reading Club