Deal Me In Challenge: Johnny Mnemonic by William Gibson

Card Drawn:

Before the Matrix, Keanu Reeves starred in this lesser-known SF cyberpunk thriller.

The opening sentence of "Johnny Mnemonic" by William Gibson is totally badass and indicative of the story's smooth hip-lingo and ultra-cool style often found in the SF cyberpunk genre: 

"I put the shotgun in an Adidas bag and padded it out with four pairs of tennis socks, not my style at all, but that was what I was aiming for: If they think you're crude, go technical; if they think you're technical, go crude."

I love this. Beginning in medias res, Gibson jumps right into the action without any explanation or context, which is disorienting and constantly challenges the reader with a fast-paced plot, jam-packed with a high density of information that can only be described as "sensory overload." What a ride. This is a familiar trope in cyberpunk that emerged in the mid 1980's  to early 1990's that was highly influenced by the aesthetic and cultural aims of the 'New Wave' from a few decades earlier but aimed to push the boundaries of science-fiction even further. Stylistically ambitious, greater attention was placed upon an experimental, avant-garde and unconventional approach to story-telling that can certainly be considered postmodernist. Moreover, many cyberpunk writers saw a return to and reworking of "Hard Science Fiction" that was also a political response to the hyper-capitalism of the Thatcher/Reagan era. 

Another salient feature of cyberpunk is pastiche or the merging of different genres and what we get here is a film-noir/hard boiled detective story (think Raymond Chandler) meets the gonzo science-fiction of Philip K. Dick but on steroids. Gibson's depiction of a near-future earth is dark, gritty and a dystopian nightmare of technology run amok. The narrator, Johnny-San, makes a living as a data-runner for the criminal underworld but not in the traditional sense: he has been augmented with hardware that allows him to store encrypted data in his brain. He gets mixed up the Yakuza and is hunted down by a cyborg assassin who has been sent to retrieve the stolen data. He meets some unusual characters along the way and perhaps that might be an understatement. For example, there is Jones the cyborg dolphin addicted to heroin who is a skilled hacker and the super-cool Molly Millions: a femme-fatale and cybernetically enhanced female assassin with blades for nails. They both team up with Johnny to help him break the code in his brain before the deadly assassin hunts them down. Their journey into 'Nighttown,' a technological wasteland inhabited by 'Lo-Tek' freaks (people living on the margins of society and unable to afford the most expensive technological upgrades on their bodies) and the final showdown on the 'Killing Floor' is full of hallucinatory weirdness.

Remember, Gibson is writing at time before the Internet existed; his prognostication of cyberspace, data piracy and hacker culture feels eerily accurate but also totally uncanny, which further highlights the story's cognitive estrangement. The dystopian dialectic of technological innovation is convincing and an all too real possibility, especially with the huge advancements being made today. The story's hard technological edge can be a little confusing because Gibson refuses to explain anything so it is up to the reader to disassemble the onslaught of techno-speak and puzzling opaqueness. He introduces new language ("Chiba", technical boy, idiot-savant mode, squids), terminology (The Killing Floor, Lo-Tek, factory custom) and unique technology (cyberspace/the matrix, superconducting quantum interfence detectors, etc) to establish a sense of 'cognitive estrangement' coined by Darko Suvin as one of main aesthetic ideologies of the Science Fiction genre. This is a wonderfully bizarre yet entertaining story that maintains a high-adrenaline intensity from start to finish. It is easy to see why Gibson is often considered one of the most influential authors of the cyberpunk genre.

My apologies for the slight digression, but I am very curious about the film version of this story and anxious to watch it. Keanu Reeves often has the reputation as a dull and uninspired actor but I seem to be in the minority who really enjoys his movies. I have also heard people say that he is a bad actor who just happens to star in really good movies. Perhaps there is truth to that statement. Granted, he is no thespian and lacks a certain emotional range but I still think he is talented with great screen-presence. Despite being a big fan of his work, I was too young when this film adaptation was released and never got around to watching it, which has become sort of a cult-classic. I think casting Keanu Reeves as Johnny is perfect because he is a character defined by his technological alterations, not personality. My initial reaction while reading this story was that it would make a great movie because of it's cinematic style, cool characters, snappy dialogue, great action scenes, dark atmosphere and such a fascinating futuristic world. There is an opportunity and so much potential to flesh out the characters and interesting story-lines, especially hinted at by the wild ending. Seriously, I would watch a movie just about the adventures of Molly Millions. I have seen the trailer and it looks incredibly cheesy but William Gibson also wrote the screenplay so how bad could it be? 

Deal Me In Challenge: The Doll's House by Katherine Mansfield

Card Drawn:

So purdy.

Can someone please explain to me why "The Doll's House" by Katherine Mansfield is so highly revered? Not to say that the story is without any redeeming qualities but it's reputation as a "classic" is completely bewildering to me. I recall reading one of her stories called "The Garden Party" years ago and do remember it being quite good so I know that she is capable of  more accomplished writing. 

This story is all about social status and class inequality experienced through the perspective of children. If the reader is not made aware of this theme in the first paragraph, Mansfield makes sure to emphasize it continually with specific character relationships and heavy-handed symbolism: the elaborate and expensive 'doll house' representing class privilege being the most obvious one. There is nothing subtle about her story-telling or thematic approach at all. Writing at the turn of the 20th century, Mansfield was influenced by the modernist movement, which is odd, since the story is quite plot oriented as opposed to focusing more on shifting tone or moods.

One of the more frustrating aspects for me is that Mansfield builds up the tension nicely between the rich Burnell sisters and the poor Kelvey sisters but the end result is very anti-climactic. I was expecting the Kelvey's to put up more of a fight and fiercely retaliate against the Burnells for being treated so badly. Their shared experience of transcendence after stealing a glimpse of the "little lamp" in the doll house felt very lackluster and contrived. They really should have taken a sledgehammer to that doll house to teach those spoiled and arrogant Burnell sisters a lesson in humility. 

Deal Me In Challenge: A Perfect Day for Kangaroos by Haruki Murakami

Card Drawn:

Baby Joey is a little shy.

Sweet, another diamond card and that means another story by Murakami! 

In the realist tradition, if the short story writer's task is to capture a glimpse, an impression, a slice-of-life or snapshot of "life in the moment," then Murakami succeeds in "A Perfect Day for Kangaroos." However, whether or not the author is able to transform this pared-down verisimilitude of reality into something significant is debatable. The very shortness of the form itself means that a certain economy of style is required that does not allow for detailed explanations. Although Murakami is experimenting with minimalism here, my main gripe with this particular story is that it feels too sparse, too understated and elliptical in its condensed form. Nonetheless, the stylistic execution is on point with the use of direct language and crisp prose making this a delightfully quick read. The story's title is likely an allusion to J.D. Salinger's excellent short-story of a similar name, "A Perfect Day for Bananafish" but that is where the similarities end.

The premise is quite simple. A couple visits a zoo to see a baby kangaroo and the girlfriend is disappointed that the cute baby joey is not hanging out in it's mother's pouch. They observe the kangaroos in their cage, talk about kangaroos for a bit, eat some hot-dogs, do some more kangaroo watching and eventually leave to grab some beers. The end. Seriously, this is all that happens and it all feels slightly trivial. The driving action and underlying tension of the story is whether or not they get to see this magical moment between mother and baby kangaroo but the dilemma is so slight, so meager as to be rendered superfluous. Murakami chooses to only offer a brief glimpse into this couple's relationship entirely through dialogue and it is difficult to extract any discernible insight into their dynamic or personal history. Perhaps the subtleties were lost on me but I am not sure what else we are expected to take away from this story. 

Deal Me In Challenge: The Circular Ruins by Jorge Luis Borges

Card Drawn:

"He understood that modeling the incoherent and vertiginous matter of which dreams are composed was the most difficult task that a man could undertake, even though he should penetrate all the enigmas of a superior and inferior order; much more difficult than weaving rope out of sand or coining the faceless wind."

"The Circular Ruins" is one of Borges' shorter works and might be slightly more accessible but that does not make it any less challenging. While the short-story form lends itself to brevity within a condensed narrative framework, it is not uncommon to be presented with only sketches or impressions as opposed to dense exposition that one would find in a novel. Thus, the very conciseness of the form induces ambiguity, suggestiveness and story-material that exists on the periphery, outside the text. Yet, Borges is one of those unique talents that seems to constantly push the boundaries of traditional narrative conventions of the short-story form. Here, with this story, he somehow miraculously packs an immense amount of detail and ideas within such a limited amount of space without compromising the intense qualities or complex meanings of the narrative. It is truly a wonder to behold.

This story is typical Borges and contains many of his familiar motifs: magical-realism, dreams, metaphysics, mirroring, illusions, paradoxes, ontology, human consciousness, cosmogony, art vs. artifice, parable, a self-reflexive narrative (the paradoxical relationship between reader, text and author is most prominent) and of course, myth-making. The premise revolves around a wizard who enters a mysterious ancient temple in the attempt to create man through dreams: 

"The purpose which guided him was not impossible, though supernatural. He wanted to dream a man; he wanted to dream him in minute entirety and impose him on reality." 

He is playing God but struggles to fully triumph over the powerful dream-world in order to conjure an idealized man and this serves a metaphor for the artist's difficult creative process. The "twist ending" is indicative of this metaphorical representation, creating a mirroring or doubling-effect that is cleverly executed. The final sentence is haunting and gives me goosebumps. 

Another interpretation is to read this text as a possible parody of the fantasy genre. Borges can be seen as subverting conventional genre tropes such as wizards and magic by placing them within his own unique metaphysical realm of the imagination, a dialectical exploration of mythopoesis through art. In his typical postmodernist fashion, Borges' concern with the creative imagination in direct correlation with literary aesthetics is inherently paradoxical--more specifically, the construction and deconstruction of the subjective self. For him, reality cannot be understand in empirical terms; it is far more subjective and mysterious than we can possibly conceive. 

Deal Me In Challenge: Her Sweet Jerome by Alice Walker

Card Drawn:

Warning: this review will contain spoilers.

My goodness, what a bleak and depressing story. Taken from Alice Walker's collection of short-stories called In Love & Trouble, "Her Sweet Jerome" perfectly embodies the aptly titled subject matter: an overweight black woman is blinded by the unconditional love towards an abusive and manipulative husband, which ultimately leads to her own self-destruction. Walker writes, "Her troubles started noticeably when she fell in love with a studiously quiet schoolteacher, Mr. Jerome Franklin Washington III, who was ten years younger than her." She is never given a first name and is only ever referred to in the story by her gender pronoun or husband's name. This is an important detail to note because the anonymity further reinforces her lack of individualism and damaging co-dependency. As a black woman who does not meet the idealized standards of beauty because of her physical appearance, she suffers from increased self-loathing, insecurity and paranoia to the point where she is utterly convinced that the husband must be cheating on her with another woman. 

Her destructive behavior in tracking down the husband's alleged mistress is presented by Walker as darkly humorous. However, the author is also keen to emphasize the insidious effects of sociocultural forces on the black female's psychological development. The story examines racialized and gendered cultural norms imposed by white hegemony within these various social contexts. The female protagonist is already a vulnerable member of the marginalized group and becomes even more ostracized by the black community for her eccentric and violent behavior. For example, the pernicious gossip about Jerome being a womanizer provokes her to assault random women in the street with a knife who are simply minding their own business and falsely accusing them of sleeping with him. The townspeople obviously try their best to avoid Mrs. Jerome Washington after these incidents occur, further demonizing her as an outcast. The story takes a few unexpected twists and turns as the obsession to find evidence of Jerome's infidelity takes over every aspect of her life. Walker subtly captures the protagonist's vulnerability beneath her hard exterior. At the core, she desperately wants to feel loved and desired as a black woman in a society that is systemically racist and fatphobic. 

The nihilistic ending left me confused and I am still unsure about what Walker intended to achieve here. Is Mrs. Jerome Washington's suicide by fire a heroic act of defiance against black male authority orchestrated by the white power structure or are we suppose to view her as some kind of martyr figure? She also burns all of Jerome's black revolutionary texts before stepping into the flames, which is probably a symbolic gesture of sorts but the meaning eludes me. Perhaps this is her way of getting back at her husband for the years of neglect, abuse and duplicity in marrying just to gain access to her inheritance so that he could fund his left-wing political movement in the fight against racial oppression and anti-black racism. Regardless, her tragic suicide seemed a tad extreme to me. Maybe Walker is suggesting that it was the only option left after struggling for years with mental health issues, a bad marriage, subsequent alienation and low self-worth promulgated by the racist origin of the dominant white standards of beauty. You tell me.

The Lonely Londoners by Sam Selvon

“It have people living in London who don’t know what happening in the room next to them, far more the street, or how other people living. London is a place like that. It divide up in little worlds, and you stay in the world you belong to and you don’t know anything about what happening in the other ones except what you read in the papers.” 

I figured it was time to take a quick break from short-stories and focus on reviewing a novel instead. Shocking, I know.

I love discovering hidden gems and Sam Selvon's The Lonely Londoners is certainly one of them. The story follows a group of black men living in--yes, you guessed it, London--during the 1950's as they experience various hardships of being discriminated in a foreign city that is predominantly white and xenophobic. Many immigrants arriving on England's shore from the West Indies are bravely optimistic like Galahad (a fitting nickname given to him by Moses, the central character in the novel who has lived in this country for many years) who have left their homeland in search of a better life only to experience a rude awakening that any notion of England's roads being paved with gold is a pure myth. Living in London as a black person is to be treated with blatant racism, a racialized "other" who is considered less than human. Work is scare and many of these people live in abject poverty, barely scraping together enough money to pay rent or feed themselves. While this sounds like it would be a bleak and depressing read, which it can be at times, the author's satirical critique of racism and black identity is actually quite funny. Selvon has a great ear for dialogue and his witty humor shines through in highlighting the absurdity of displacement within this diasporic space.

The narrative framework consists of a series of 'ballads' or vignettes mostly mediated from the perspective of Moses and is written in a type of creolization that lends itself to an authentic representation of a working-class black vernacular. Thus, Selvon's narrative technique is intrinsically connected to the articulation of lived experience and the need to establish a collective voice against the oppression of language itself. He uses specific language to shape the fragmented Caribbean consciousness. Despite its relatively short length, Selvon's work offers a complex representation of the black diaspora--more specifically, home and homelessness. The underlying irony is that even though life in England is pretty terrible, many of these black men refuse to return home. On other words, they are stuck in limbo, neither here nor there. Selvon's London is often presented as a phantasmagoria, a dream-like and confounding space for them as they battle loneliness and disappointment. Their desire for stability remains out of reach and they must adapt to a hostile environment. Yet, Selvon somehow manages to find humor in their interminable struggle, which is no easy accomplishment. Such a great read. 

Deal Me In Challenge: Dabchick by Haruki Murakami

Card Drawn:

"The little palm-sized dabchicks taste so bad you couldn't get a dog to eat one."

Murakami does his best to channel Kafka in this nightmarish and funny story about the absurd and oppressive bureaucratic system. The protagonist in "Dabchick" finds himself trapped in a literal and metaphorical labyrinth of bureaucratic nonsense. The term Kafkaesque would certainly be appropriate to describe this story, especially regarding its hallucinatory aspects and critique of authority. 

The protagonist is starting a new job at some faceless corporation and finds himself lost in a maze of corridors trying to find the office. He eventually locates the correct door after what seems like an eternity but is then met by a guard that denies him access because the correct password is required. Their comedic exchange makes up the bulk of the story and is meant to be ridiculous. Perhaps Murakami is excoriating the absurdity of functional hierarchy, useless policies and perfunctory regulations that depersonalize the individual caught up in the machinations of bureaucracy. However, this is probably just me over-analyzing the text since I do not get the sense that Murakami's aim is to provide some kind of profound social commentary. The dark satirical humor and complete absurdity of it all is what makes this story memorable. The ending is hilarious in all of its anthropomorphic splendor with the dabchick boss sitting at his desk thinking about death and getting angry over the intercom at the protagonist being late for work. The surrealism of this scene alone is enough to crack me up. 

Deal Me in Challenge: The Necklace by Guy de Maupassant

Card Drawn:

Pourquoi devez-vous être un gamin gâté, mon chéri?

I am actually surprised that "The Necklace" by Guy de Maupassant was not spoiled for me since it is one of the most famous short stories ever written. While it does not quite live up to all the hype in my eyes, there is no denying the author's excellent literary technique and should be applauded for his influence on the modern short-story. His taut and economical prose flows seamlessly without any extraneous detail--every word, every sentence, every symbolic or metaphorical aspect of the text serves a purpose towards highlighting the key themes and driving the narrative headstrong towards the "twist ending" that actually took me by surprise even though it was not totally convincing. Indeed, it is no wonder that this story is heavily anthologized and often praised as the pinnacle of the short-story form.

Mathilde Loisel is an unhappy woman blinded by her own pride and vanity. She is the wife to a government clerk and lives a modest life but desperately yearns to be accepted a member of the elite. They both get invited to a fancy party but she is anxious about being humiliated in front of all those rich people by not dressing in the newest fashions or wearing any expensive jewelry. Mathilde needs to look the part if she is to assimilate properly among the French aristocracy. The necklace is intrinsically linked to the woman's self-worth and social status--a marker of wealth and prestige, which allows her access to the social circles occupied by upper class bourgeoisie or nouveau riche that would otherwise have been denied as a member of the middle-class. She suffers from a crisis of identity, which inevitably leads to her downfall. 

Enthralled by delusions of grandeur, success and fortune, Mathilde opts to wear the most splendid fashions and garments. So, she asks her friend to borrow a lavish necklace for the party and wearing it becomes a symbolic conduit of her newly obtained social status. She receives many compliments by the party-goers and is given an honorable social reception. However, that feeling of euphoria is short-lived and transformed into full-blown panic when she loses the necklace on the way home from the party. The story takes a dark turn and Maupassant systematically unfolds her and the husband's fall into financial ruin to pay back the friend for losing the necklace, which is very expensive to replace. 

For those who have not read this story yet, go seek it out and then come back to this review because there will be spoilers. You can find it easily enough online...

Okay, have you read it yet? No? What are you still doing here! Please go read it already!!!  

Wonderful, you finally got around to reading this story. If not, don't say that I didn't warn you:

Now, the flawed ending. Granted, Maupassant makes us sympathize heavily with Mathilde and her husband's tragic fate. However, did it never occur to either of them to first consult with Mathilde's friend after losing the necklace instead of taking on the unnecessary burden of paying her back? While I cannot fault them for their good intentions, are we to believe that they would endure ten years of pain and suffering without ever communicating with this woman? Moreover, the woman did not even contact Mathilde once about returning the necklace during the entire time span so you would think at some point they would stop and properly assess the situation?! Ugh. A gaping plot-hole that is difficult for me to overlook.

Nonetheless, this was still a quick and worthwhile read. Maupassant is a talented writer, working within the constraints of brevity dictated by form to deliver a highly polished and unobtrusive short-story. 

Deal Me In Challenge: Learning to Be Me by Greg Egan

Card Drawn:

"The Jewel" is the path to immortality but at what cost?

My main issue with the Hard Science Fiction genre is that it can be frustratingly inaccessible with its high density of information and unrelenting technical jargon. Taken from Greg Egan's excellent collection entitled Axiomatic, "Learning to Be Me" finds a nice balance between the author's mind-bending scientific concepts and adept story-telling abilities. What does it mean to be human? is often at the heart of a lot of science fiction but here the author reverses the question: What is it like not to be human? Set in the not-so-distant future, this story introduces a new technology where the brain is eventually removed and replaced by a device called "The Jewel," allowing humans to live forever. The device is implanted at birth while the brain is still in the early stages of development and learns over time to replicate all the cognitive functions, sensory inputs and active neurons that make up a person's consciousness. Pretty cool stuff if you ask me.

Transhumanism is the primary ideological discourse explored in the story. Those individuals with the Jewel implant would technically still be human but that does not necessarily mean that they actually feel human. The protagonist undergoes the procedure and struggles to reconcile between his human self and Jewel self. Egan then delivers a terrifying scenario: what if a person undergoes "the switch" (as it is referred to in the story) but there is an error and they no longer have control over their new brain? The paradox of subjectivity engenders the protagonist's otherness and is dramatized by his intense paranoia. An intense cognitive dissonance gives way to the story's psychological realism as the protagonist is confronted by the ontological Other: himself. He is both human and nonhuman. The story's fatalistic implications seem to suggest that humanism is under threat by technological advancements and our impending dissolution is inevitable.

The first person narrative voice gives us direct access to his inner thoughts but this focalization is undermined by the nonhuman aspects of this technological modification. Therefore, who is the real person during this merging of consciousness? Egan's narrative ingenuity is most apparent with the shifting focalization that occurs simultaneously, making the first person narrative voice particularly tricky to pin down. Is the protagonist a reliable narrator or is the Jewel the unreliable narrative voice the entire time? Fascinating stuff.