What is your reaction to the novel as a whole? If you liked it, what did you enjoy most about it? If you didn't, what about the story did you find lacking?
Upon finishing Oracle Night, I was left in awe, possessing some feelings of astonishment concerning the ending of the novel. The novel is very captivating and interesting. The fact that Paul Auster was able to juggle two different plots is extremely talented. Somehow the novel’s ending wasn’t satisfying enough, yet somehow it is exactly the perfect ending for the novel. Surly it did rap-up all the single story lines in the novel, but it was missing the certain “flavor” which had been available all through the rest of the story.
Auster’s way of not dividing his novel into chapters is noteworthy, especially when understanding one of the main themes, time, and how time is linear, as though everything continues to continue. Even though the plot is over duration of a couple of days, the author allows everything to flow easily, depicting the flow of time. There are many references to time and the explicit difference between the past and future mainly when Sidney was considering writing the screenplay. “…As soon as one person began to travel in time, time as we knew it would be destroyed…”
From its multi-layered gripping plots to the occasional foot notes in which the Sidney describes the background, there are many special and unique features about Oracle Night.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I also really liked the theme of the continuity of time. I found it very approriate for Auster to not have chapters and also the way he incorporated footnotes into the story. Like you mentioned, the book not being divided into chapters emphasizes the idea of time being linear. In addition, he makes footnotes rather than have the information as part of the plot because all the footnotes are explaining the past and are not part of the plotline. I found the novel very interesting and I enjoyed reading it, however, I also beleive that it lacked a complete ending. Like you said, it was missing that certain "flavor".
:)
The screenplay is a very interesting point that you've touched upon! As I realize it, this aspect of the novel is very much linked to the continuity of time, as you mentioned. I also agree with the idea of how the book's lacking of numbered chapters gave the ideas and events a smooth, uninterrupted flow. an impressive point of view you also have on the footnotes and how them about the past has an impact on including them in the text. You've certainly grasped the motive behind the author's peculiar writing style, in my opinion.
I love that you mentioned the screenplay! I think that Paul Auster merely added this story within a story to clarify his theme of time. He refers to the past, present and future continuously throughout the novel making it clear that the idea of time is a main theme. Also the fact that the book is not divided creates an element of continuity not only related to time but to the flow of ideas (stream of consciousness).
Even though the ending was blunt and slightly "flavor"less, I found it to be perfectly fitting to the story. Because Sid, just like Nick, had come to a certain halt in his life where he had to deal with the truth of his situation.
Post a Comment