Lincoln in the Bardo.

George Saunders is best known for his short stories, including the award-winning collection Tenth of December, so there was tremendous anticipation for his first full-length novel, Lincoln at the Bardo, when it was released last year; the transition from short form fiction to long is not a simple one, given how few writers (F. Scott Fitzgerald comes to mind) excelled at both. Lincoln at the Bardo is short, experimental, comprising entirely quotes from real and fictional sources, set in a sort of purgatory on earth, where Saunders gives us a grieving Abraham Lincoln among a multitude of shades who have yet to cross over, including that of his eleven-year-old son, Willie. (In Tibetan Buddhism, the bardo is the period of existence between one’s death and next rebirth.)

The novel, which won the prestigious Man Booker Prize last year, opens with Willie dying of fever in an upstairs bedroom even as a White House party takes a place below, while we are also introduced to the three shades who will be our guides to this mysterious netherworld Saunders has constructed in the graveyard where Willie will be laid to rest. These spirits can interact with each other, but can’t be seen or heard by any living characters in the novel (a cheat I’m glad Saunders avoided); they can ‘enter’ a living body, and see his thoughts or feel his feelings, but the living are unaware of the shades’ presence or existence. The spirits appear incorporate to each other, and most carry some manifestation from their lives, often delivering substantial comic relief to a novel that by its very subject is weighty and tenebrous.

The three guides – Reverend Everly Thomas, who is unsure why he appears to have been condemned to hell; Roger Bevins III, a gay man who killed himself when his lover left him; and Hans Vollman, whose story is too funny to be spoiled here – try to convince Willie’s shade to cross over to the afterlife, which the shades we meet in the graveyard by and large have declined to do. Willie’s reluctance comes about because his father visited him in the graveyard and has promised to return, so Willie decides to stay, unaware of the significant consequences that can arise from this refusal. His father does return, leading to the climactic sequence where the shades all work together to try to convince Willie to cross, or to get his father to say something to accomplish the same, with unintended, tragicomic results.

The story unfurls entirely through quotes, many of which are drawn from contemporary newspaper accounts or later anthologies of letters or remembrances of the period, often showing how inconsistent descriptions of the same event can be – or how diverse sources can still agree on something like the sadness of President Lincoln’s visage even before his son’s death. Most of the quotes in the book are fabrications, either narrated by the three shades or attributed directly to the spirits who spoke them, and they run the gamut from the loquacious to the sentimental to the ridiculous, especially the Barons, a deceased husband and wife who seem locked in an eternal competition over who can swear the most, and have little shame about any peccadilloes from their previous lives. Some of these chapters are so tangential that they lead you well away from the main story around Willie and his father, and thus from what appears to be the ostensible point of the book: How do we love when those we love must die, and how do we move on with our lives when they’re gone?

Historical records of the time describe Lincoln as consumed by grief, visiting his son’s grave many times and talking aloud to his deceased son, providing Saunders with an ample starting point for this story, which gives us a President who knows he must persevere for his remaining family and for his country, but who is constantly drawn back to the graveyard and to his memories. (His wife, Mary Todd Lincoln, appears but briefly in the novel.) Saunders has also given us Willie and his comrades in the land of shade as grief incarnate; none of them can cross over until they acknowledge that they’re dead, as survivors can’t move on with their lives until they grieve and accept their losses.

I could have done without the glib ending, where Saunders gives Lincoln a little extra nudge in the direction in which the President actually took the war and his domestic policy, which felt too much like a wink and a nod to the audience. The myriad ways in which the shades interact with each other and attempt to do so with Lincoln provide plenty of comic relief, often bawdy and frequently hitting its mark, but having that aspect of the story touch actual history at the novel’s conclusion left me with a bitter taste, as if Saunders wanted to tell the reader he was just kidding about all the serious philosophical stuff that came before.

The few reviews I’ve read of Lincoln in the Bardo focus on Lincoln’s character in the book and how Saunders explores the father’s grief at the loss of his son, but that was less compelling than the novel’s inherent exploration of the temporary nature of our lives and of all of our loves. Was Lincoln’s love of his son somehow worth less because his son died so young? How do we cope with knowing that those we love will die – die before us, leaving us heartbroken, or die after us, a grief that we can only imagine and wish to prevent at any cost? Saunders tears open the paper covering up these questions, without providing pat answers, but revealing something about the human condition that I haven’t seen before in another novel.

Next up: Joan Silber’s 2017 novel Improvement, winner of the most recent National Book Critics Circle Award.

Comments

  1. Andrew Cohen

    I figured you would block me, but wanted to make sure you saw my last reply.

    Regarding your small sample size argument, Bruce was -1 outs above average in 2016, which is tied for 69th among the 128 OF with a minimum of 100 opportunities. With Statcast numbers for both 2016+2017, it’s more likely UZR is the problem.

    Lastly, I do apologize for losing my temper and name-calling.

    • There’s simply no reason to resort to that kind of language, regardless of whether you think you’re right.

  2. Andrew Cohen

    I completely agree. It was entirely unnecessary, an error in judgment.

    I’d appreciate if you would unblock me as I really enjoy hearing what you have to say, but understand if you’re unwilling.

  3. Keith, I’m going to make a suggestion, which you are free to discard. Have you ever considered, in book/movie reviews, a small section either at the top or the bottom with a very short “recommendation” that does not get too much into the plot, or any events? Just a “highly recommended” or “recommended for sci-fi fans” or something, for those of us who’d rather go in blind? Obviously this is your blog, that you seem to do to arrange your own thoughts, but it’s something I’d appreciate. I find myself skimming through these to get the gist and then coming back to read them later in full (after having consumed the media), but there have been a couple times I’ve gleaned information I’d rather have not had (but that you understandably needed to include in order to summarize the plot). You’re obviously very careful about this, which I appreciate.

    Anyway, take it or leave it; I’m going to keep reading either way and I appreciate your work.

    • I do tag various things as highly recommended; the tags appear at the bottom of each post, which I guess isn’t totally ideal for your purposes but might help with all the posts already up?

  4. I’ve put this one on the way-backburner because I have yet to really enjoy anything I’ve read from Saunders. And the reviews thus far have been mixed, despite the fact that the book has won numerous awards and found itself on many year-end lists. I’ve read two other books from last year’s Man/Booker Short List, and, additionally, two other from the Long List. I was very surprised Autumn or Exit West didn’t win.