This post steers anyone in another direction, although I want to thank Meera for refreshing me on Nodelman and his definition of children's literature. It's interesting to think about with Hoot, although I feel like it's more complex than the Hoot characters are. I don't even know if this book deserves a critical argument like that. But I think I'm just copping out. Anyway...
So I was intrigued by the interweaving of the narratives and perspectives. I thought it was done okay at most times, like when Roy is in the hospital waiting for Mullet Fingers (seriously, is everyone else picturing a really dirty barefooted boy with a disgusting ratty mullet for a hairdo?) and he hears a siren, so he disappears for a while, and then we see the scene where the parents drive up to the hospital with Officer Delinko and his siren wailing, and the timing and pacing and sequence all kind of come together.
But I have another question: whose book is this? And if you so quickly and automatically answered Roy's, then why all the different perspectives? And if you want to argue for Mullet Fingers (and I can't call him Napoleon either, as that conjures up Dynamite images), is that possible when we never see the story from his perspective?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Despite the varied POVs, I read it as Roy's story.
I want to back that up but my brain is foggy.
I think it's Roy's story because he's the one who changed/grew/learned. He became more aware of his environment and how to deal with people who did bad things (the bully or Curly), and I wish I could be more specific but I don't have a memory and my book is at home.
Mullet Fingers didn't change, he was the whatchamacallit of change, he brought it on. Everyone else was just a prop or antagonist.
Why all the different perspectives? In some cases (like at the hospital), probably so we can understand what's really going on, and why the props (parents) do what they do.
But in the case of Curly and Officer Delinko, I think it's for comedy. Hiaasen has a need to include these comically stupid and misdirected characters (and I have no problem with that), and if the whole story were from Roy's point of view, we wouldn't get nearly as much interaction with them.
And then I think there's also the benefit of omnipotence. Since we get all these different perspectives, it allows us to solve the "mystery" that much earlier than everyone else, so we can anticipate the solution.
Post a Comment