Snapshot of my Q&A I did with the entertainment and media magazine, "The Wrap"

The Wrap Interview

1) Do you think that there should be a new movie with based on your theory?

Good question. My first thought was no, but now I think yes.

2) Who do you see being cast for the role of a passing Jay Gatsby?

Always thought Wentworth Miller because he has the look. But now I think Jesse Williams because he has both the chops and the understanding - he would need some make up though. But now I think it should be played by a man who looks very brown to us. So each time the viewer sees him from their pov he's brown, but anytime the viewer sees him from the other character's pov he looks white, but not ultra white. Example, long shot at parties, brown, but Daisy looking at both of them in the mirror, whiter. Seems confusing on paper, but this changing pov needs to happen just a few times to give us the idea and could be stunning in the hands of a visual artist. Alternatively, he could be played by a Wentworth-type person, but then you'd have to come out of the narrative to show he's mixed, like invent some scenes by himself or invent other people who know or show us that Wolfsheim knows, etc. But I'd hate to change the narrative when part of my argument is that it is all there in the narrative. It's what I call our "assumptive pov" that must change. So I think the brown/ white idea, though tricky, works best. Big question: what does Gatsby see when he looks in the mirror by himself? Answer: mixed. He knows who he is.

3) What kind of reaction have you gotten yet from readers, others?

Very positive. Everyone finishes quickly, remarking that it was easy to read- which was one of my big goals. Many have said that they didn't see what was so great about the novel but that this theory changed their opinion of it. Most are surprised by Fitz's background and to the extent they are convinced by the theory, so far most people have credited the information about the original title. It seems that the younger the reader, the more acceptance of the idea. (I expected that.) A good number have been inspired to read another related book or re-read Gatsby. The best thing is that some have learned how much can be read between the lines of a great work. A spider's web is made of threads AND the space between. It's the same with a novel - and with this novel especially.

And just thinking further on this, this may be why the Gatsby films fail. It's hard to get at the space between the lines. Lurhman's came closest. He didn't interpret the novel so literally that he was forced to use jazz in the film. In my opinion he seemed to understand that what was important to convey was the idea of upstart, upsetting black music. Jazz then, hip-hop/rap now.

4) Do you think your book will get more of a pushback in the Era of Trump?

No. I think it will get more of a push forward in this Era of Diversity. Having said that, I am braced for the hate. ( White supremacists claim this book. Did you know that? ) They may be ok with the idea, because after all a black Gatsby gets what he deserves. I think the most flack will come from the set of readers who think Fitz's writing is about nothing deeper than a glass of champagne and who want to see that part of '20's society as being about whiteness - which it was, just perhaps not in the way they think. And there will be a lot of push back from academics of course.

5) What relevance does your book have in the Age of Trump?

This theory tells Americans of color and immigrants to America that this great American novel, telling the great American story of self-empowerment and reinvention, includes them. It only makes sense that it should. It also shows that this entanglement with race and immigration has been with us for a long time and that we have to decide what kind of society we want.

6) Do you seem similarities with American society now and the 1920s when Fitz wrote the Great Gatsby?

Yes. Race is still the organizing principles of the melting pot.

7) Is America still obsessed with whiteness and racial purity?

Whiteness, yes. Purity, no - not most people anyway. Whiteness is still a "keys to the city" type of thing. Those who are able to claim it without easy dispute, do - even if they know they aren't pure.
I worked at a place once where almost everyone wore the mantle of white until it became advantageous, until they were given a key, to declare a Latino heritage. Things changed quickly.
If I were king everyone would have to take a DNA test so they would stop othering so much and see how unpure and muggle-ish most of us are.

"Camino Island" - a reader's blog Chapters 6, 7, 8 and epilogue

It's wrapped up in bow. By the end no one is doing anything different than you would guess. That, of course, is characteristic of the traditional form of this genre. I just wish getting there had been a bit messier.

I am guessing that "Camino Island" will not be a Grisham classic. Even his admirers have to admit that there is some lazy writing here. At one point the narrator describes with some disdain modern writing that uses unfamiliar words and no quotation marks. Later, one of the main characters also expresses this same point of view.  When you read it the second time, you begin to lose the illusion and along with it your trust in the writer. It's the writer's job to keep the theater darkened. Also, I wish his characters would stop "easing" everywhere they go and instead move with a bit more purpose and personality.

By the way, don't take legal advice from this book.  It is not accurate that you cannot record a conversation without the other person's permission. In some states as long as all participants in a conversation are within a state a state you can and you use certain methods, you can. Kinda hate that a lawyer gets this wrong.

Final pet peeve: It is funny that the novel frowns upon prologues but carries an epilogue since they are both cheating features authors use to say what often should have been said in the body of the book. In this case the epilogue is equivalent to everyone standing around in the  final   "Columbo" scene letting the criminal explain what he did.  Again, that is common in the thriller/detective genre. So it is not a problem, unless you find commonness a problem. (Which I do.)

I read the book quickly and will remember what happened in it as long as I remember that I read it. Not sure that I will. In this way I suspect  Grisham fits well into the American diet of fluff and "Next!". That's ok. And that sells books. 300 million of them.

"Camino Island" - a reader's blog Chapter 5

This chapter contains, and I mean that in the truest sense of the word, the bad guy action. I guess there are only so many ways you can describe one man threatening another with strangulation, but I do appreciate at least a stab at originality.

Some Grisham readers say that "Camino Island" is Grisham-light and that his other books are more thrill-worthy. I will have to trust them - because I don't plan to read anymore Grisham. But I do wonder why the thrills in this book are so by-the-book.

Take this scene that reads more like a description of every scene that eventually happens in detective TV films and series -

'With an iron grip he grabbed Jazik's throat and rammed his head against the back wall of the elevator. "Don't talk to me like that. A message for your client. One wrong word to the FBI and people will get hurt. We know where his mother lives, and we know where your mother lives too."

Jazik's eyes bulged as he dropped his briefcase. He grabbed the stranger's s arm but the death grip just got tighter. '

and even in detective books:

'In desperation she tried to jerk herself free from Hank. But her captor gripped her more securely and laughed as she cried out in pain.
[...]
"Let me go!"
[She] twisted and squirmed, but her efforts only made Hank tighten his grip. "Good thing you got her, Hank, " Maurice Hale called. "The little wildcat. We'll give her a double dose for this smart trick. No [one's] going to put anything over on me!"'


Can you tell which is Nancy Drew and which is Grisham? Neither can I. 

Further reading: 

 

Writers and non-writers alike know that it takes mastery to write a finished story that is coherent and even mildly interesting. I am not taking anything away from Grisham - he is just not my cup of tea.

Character, Character, Character

In his book "On Writing", Stephen King stakes out the principle that character is everything. No character, no story.

My corollary:  Nothing makes you aware of characterization deficit more than a love scene. If you don't know how your character seduces, then you don't know your character.

"Camino Island" - a reader's blog Chapter 4

Some may say that this was the wrong Grisham novel from which to distill his style and substance.  On the substance side, I can see how this book is unlike Grisham. It appears to be somewhat short on the thrills and long on the chick lit side - except that the love interest is an unwritten novel.

However, this novel also deals much with writing and writers. Reading this from the narrator's pov on page 106, in addition to other somewhat derisive passages about underselling and literary writers,  it is hard not to see an authorial bias in favor of the same straight-forward writing style in which this book is written:

"[The plot] was a nice setup, but the writing was so convoluted and pretentious that any reader would have difficulty plowing through. No scene was clear, so that the reader was never certain Ms. Trane obviously had a pen in one hand and a thesaurus in the other because Mercer saw long words for the first time. And just as frustrating, the dialogue was not identified with quotation marks, and often it was not clear who said what."

I'm beginning to wonder if Grisham himself sees this novel as somewhat of a guide to the writing life, a master spilling his secrets towards the end of his career.  Just a thought.  

"Camino Island" - a reader's blog Chapters 1, 2 & 3

The plot of Camino Island is the search for the original manuscripts of five of F. Scott Fitzgerald's novels that have been stolen from a library at Princeton. The characters include some of my favorite types  - book thieves, book collectors, book writers and extra-judicial detectives. Especially because of my interest in F. Scott Fitzgerald and my book, Jay Gatsby: A Black Man in Whiteface, and because no lawyers are involved, I chose this as my first John Grisham book. 

I was jarred by the plainness of the language in the first paragraph. And then in the first page. And then in the whole first chapter. He uses tenth grade vocabulary. The heist itself plays out with the simplicity of a a 1970's detective show -  distraction is the name of the game.

The second chapter. This focuses on the life of the book collector  - entirely. This Grisham guy not only likes clean language but also clean chapters. One does not spill over into the other.  Heck, you might have to check back to see if they are even in the same book. 

After another rather clinical cut comes chapter three. A new person, a new story  -  except this chapter shoots out a few streamers in the direction of chapters 1 and 2.  

I am floored. How much more basic can it get? This? This soars to the number one spot on the NY Times fiction bestseller list? Why does it seem so ... easy? (I know it is not.)

If you're asking what's not to like about straight forward language you haven't attended a writing workshop in the past 30 years.  There we are told to write with not-too-obvious purpose, with style. We must know why Gustave Flaubert's Monsieur Bovary refers to his wife's ear as a "lobe". (Hint: he is a doctor.) We must understand that you can't really see a thing until you lose its name. We must see how the shape of the paragraph itself conveys the tone of the novel. Surely, there must be a skillful way to help the reader understand the import of the third line in the first chapter by what you have written in the fifth chapter. We are told not to tell the story, but to show it. And a title without a trick? Please! (However, if you want to issue a piece without a title, now that might be something...)

But then here comes Mr. Grisham with a simple story that is, well, simply well-told.  Yes, I am only on chapter three, but it seems clear that this is going to unfold with Agatha Christie-like precision, pace and logic. Indeed, there is something weirdly comfortable about that.

What are the readers saying? The first laudatory comments on GoodReads.com say:

"Everytime I read a book by John Grisham I am consistently reminded of what a great storyteller he is..."  

"compact, direct and to the point -... pulls you in immediately"

 "the writing is very matter-of-fact, ....nothing very thrilling or exciting"

"It's divided into sections.." (!) 

"told on a minute-by-minute basis"

"the story unfolds bit by bit, section by section"

"the writing is trademark crisp" 

So, there you have it. There is a consistency, a pace, an order and clearness that seems to appeal. 

This is my first lesson: Grisham is a no-trick pony. 

"Camino Island" - a reader's blog

300 million.  That's the number of books John Grisham has sold before his latest book "Camino Island"  came out this month. It is already number one on the New York Times bestseller's list. Stick with me as I read and try to discover why. There will be spoilers but hopefully also enlightenment.

" The Idiot" by Elif Batuman

If you don't want to read a novel where chaste Harvard undergrads with ties to foreign countries fall in love while they talk in detail about higher math concepts and agglutinate suffixes, then don't read this book. There is no binge drinking, scavenger hunts or  fountain jumping. Sexual tension is found in the lapping of waves against a canoe on the Danube.

If you want to read a book whose form functions as part of the narrative - like Joyce's "Portrait of the  Artist as a Young Man" - then perhaps you would like this book. It is almost a journal about a linguist major who tries to find the meaning of language and how to apply her education to one of the most fundamental of human experiences: becoming an adult. Expect twisty curves to  both nowhere and somewhere ahead.