Despite some initial misgivings, I ended up enjoying the Mezzanine; Nicholson Baker's syntax and use of the "white background" was usually engaging, even when the "plot" itself was not. I initially read the novel as I believe it was intended: to show the interesting and important aspects of what we think is mundane life in the modern world. There's certainly a lot of evidence that this is what Baker was going for, and I think most of us started identifying with Howie to a certain extent.
But the more I thought about the Mezzanine, the more I started to think of it as an extreme satire. Instead of Baker writing about the beauty to be found is 20th century life, he may be arguing that 20th century life has become so devoid of purpose, so alike to machines in an assembly line, that Howie and others are forced to contemplate more or less irrelevant topics, such as the evolution of straws, milk cartons, and light refraction in escalators.
Because of this, Howie loses some of his sanity (it seems too strong of a word, but it moves somewhere in that direction), going on for paragraphs about the rejuvenating properties of alcohol on neurons, and making engaging small talk with a coworker about smoke alarms. Perhaps the most significant scene in the novel occurs when Howie is confronted with the philosopher who states that one should pursue and contemplate "big ideas" instead of the transient. Howie has a very strong reaction to this, and instead of defending himself or at least contemplating, he simply rejects it out of hand. The fact that the reader can or must identify with Howie at this point due to the novel's narration from the 1st and 2nd person perspectives only furthers the argument that we in modern society have lost sight of a destination or purpose.
I think Howie really appreciates things that other people may not; he is unwilling to simply see the world as a mechanical routine. I think we all lose our "sanity" during certain thoughts we have, but we just don't express those thoughts to others like Howie does. I think we are often inclined to understand Howie's thoughts because he is speaking in the second person. Second person can make the reader feel more comfortable with the narrator, because he/she feels like the narrator is telling them information, rather than just stating it while the reader listens.
ReplyDeleteI love the idea of this book as a satire, and I think it would actually word very well as one. While I read it as more a sincere exploration of the little things in life and of how people think, it could easily be a sort of joke. Howie's extreme enthusiasm about culture and technology could definitely be a commentary on how caught up people are in it. "Perforation! Shout it out!" honestly seems like a line that could only be in a satire. I think it'd be interesting to re-read the book looking at it in that way.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAlthough the enthusiasm and charm of the book would offset me from believing this, it is an absolutely hilarious concept. If it were to work as a satire, maybe "drying out" the more personal parts of Howie's commentary would suffice to create a homage-like novel to a bitingly humorous and analytical perspective. I'd enjoy either.
ReplyDeleteThis is an intriguing view of the book. I see the validity of your point when considering how in-depth and abstract Howie becomes at times. However, this could also just be the narrator's intricate mind at work. I think that my interpretation differs a little. A piece of evidence that you use is the philosopher who believes that one should, as you said, "pursue and contemplate 'big ideas' instead of the transient". After rereading the philosopher's quote though, I find that it is condemning life in general. He seems to be suggesting that all life on Earth has no meaning. He does not mention any bigger ideas. Therefore, I feel that Howie becomes enraged because he appreciates his existence to the fullest. He finds life to be so rich because of all these small occurrences that he writes about, which the philosopher calls "transient and trivial". Maybe one of the purposes of this book was to raise acknowledgement of how special life is. Especially when considering this time in history, I think that people might have needed a reminder of how the "little things" in life can actually make a large difference in our happiness if we pay attention to them.
ReplyDeleteThis is an interesting idea, and something like this has occurred to me before--something about the corporate setting, which is generally portrayed as alienating and robotic in literature, here becomes absurdly elevated to the status of utter fascination, only we get no larger sense of purpose or meaning behind this elevation. We don't even know what Howie's company does, or what he does for the company.
ReplyDeleteThis could indeed be read as satire, in the vein of, "This CAN'T be serious!" Howie seems totally straightfaced in his celebration of perforation and Jiffy-Pop, but Baker (who left a job much like Howie's to become a writer) might indeed be having some fun with us. In Howie, we see a guy whose mind is way too active, idiosyncratic, and brilliant to be contained by some narrow desk job. He can staple memos all day, without even applying much thought, when he'd really much rather tell you all kinds of interesting things about the stapler he's using to staple the memo.