There There.

Tommy Orange’s debut novel There There draws its title from multiple sources, including the great Radiohead song of that name and the oft-used but misunderstood Gertrude Stein quote about Oakland, which might give you some idea of how hazy and broad the novel is as a whole. With twelve central characters in a novel of a scant 290 pages – including a lot of white space – there are interesting ideas but, for readers who like to connect with characters in novels they read, not much there here.

Orange is Native American, a enrolled member of the Cheyenne and Arapaho Tribes of Oklahoma (I was ignorant of this idea of enrollment before this) and the idea of being Native American in our current society, which simultaneously fetishizes aspects of indigenous cultures while putting substantial pressure on people of Native descent to assimilate. The twelve characters in There There are connected by a complex web of biological relationships and coincidental acquaintances, all of which leads them to a major pow-wow at whatever it is we’re calling the Oakland A’s stadium right now. Several of the characters plan to rob the powwow using 3D printed guns made by yet another character, which, of course, leads to a mass shooting event that closes out the book. (That’s a spoiler, but if you don’t see that coming by everything that comes before, we may need to talk about foreshadowing.)

The characters themselves don’t get enough page time to develop any depth or to distinguish themselves from each other – it’s not always this simple, but 14-15 pages per character doesn’t give the author much time to develop them – so I had a particularly hard time keeping their relationships straight. That’s exacerbated by what I assume was a major point of Orange’s – that the fractured nature of Native Americans living in a sort of parallel or shadow world next to ours can lead to fractured family relationships. Nobody in this novel has or grew up in a nuclear two-parent home where all members were biologically related, and many were raised by someone other than a parent. In that sense, the lack of definition around the characters works in the novel’s favor, because every individual seems just a little out of focus – and from the way many of them describe their upbringings, that may also represent how they feel.

There are other elements of Native culture present in the book that didn’t make sense to me in context, although I could simply have failed to understand them because I know so little about Native traditions. Several characters report pulling spiders’ legs out of their own legs – they’ll have a wound or cyst of some sort, and then will pull strands out of them that resemble spiders’ legs. It’s the only bit of magical realism in the novel – assuming that’s what it is – and it’s never explained, eventually just disappearing without explanation. If that’s a symbol, I missed it, and yet felt like there was something significant about the descriptions that I needed to grasp to fully understand the book.

And then there’s the mass shooting, which, unfortunately, is way too familiar in contemporary fiction, which is of course an artifact of how familiar mass shootings are in American life today. The way the shooting plays out makes it feel like a jumble of knots Orange used to tie off all of the loose threads he’d created over the course of the novel, and avoids the trap of having to give each of these characters individual endings. The failure to develop any of the characters also makes the ending – some are shot, at least one dies, some do heroic things – surprisingly inert for what should be an evocative portrayal of a gigantic trauma. You should feel something when a significant named character dies on the page; I was still trying to sort out who was who, leaving me disconnected from everything that happened to them.

I heard of There There from a site that tries to predict each year’s Pulitzer winner so that collectors can try to get first editions; this was currently their most likely title to win, although I don’t believe they had last year’s winner, Less, on their board at all. (They nailed the previous year’s winner, The Underground Railroad.) Perhaps they’re right – it has been positively reviewed, and stories about Native Americans in modern America would fit the Pulitzer’s guidelines favoring stories about the American experience. It just didn’t click with me in the least.

Next up: Already more than halfway through the Booker Prize-winning novel The Finkler Question by Howard Jacobson.

Comments

  1. This has been on my to-read list for a bit. I find it interesting, however, that most of the reviews from the literary establishment are unabashedly great, while the ones from regular readers are more average, or even, disappointing.

  2. My reaction was very similar to yours. I often found myself stopping and asking, “who is this guy, again?” when the focus shifted from one character to another. I feel like this book could have been twice as long and maybe still not completely fleshed out all of the characters’ different stories. I can’t say I disliked it, but I had much higher expectations for it, based on what I’d read about it.

  3. I would argue that given most of the characters’ struggles with identity (both the search for and understanding of), the lack of clarity as a reader regarding the characters’ interconnectedness adds to the poignancy of the novel (although it is confusing). Having gone through my own share of difficulties, I can hardly imagine going through them again except with the added weight of a conflicted and confused identity from birth and an active opposition to my existence at every turn.

    I would also argue that giving the dozen-or-so characters each only limited exposure serves to highlight the characters’ shared heritage and experiences, and allows you to, in some sense, consider them more as parts of a whole rather than separate pieces.

  4. I’m with you on this review. Too much going on in too short of a time frame (page frame?) to make the ending anything more than a bunch of words on paper.