Do I have to talk in code to talk about this book?
Okay, so my main question is - because maybe it's simple and I just missed it and y'all can fill me in - What the hell happened to this Frog kid? Did we find out why he went to DC?
And can I point once again to The Crying of Lot 49 which seems, somehow, like an answer to this book's love affair with coincidences and unfounded intuitive decisions? Does anyone know what I'm talking about? You know, just like the French, they like totally would know what I'm talking about, y'know? Like? (I am the worst Puerto Rican/Catholic/Army brat ever, according to myself... hint hint.)
Is this thing on? Test... test...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Mkay, so I just finished it. I'm behind. Sue me.
This book seems to suffer from multiple personality disorder. On the one hand, it invites you to be a puzzle-solver with the hidden message in the illustrations. On the other hand, it presents WAY too many coincidences and patterns and dreams to take seriously. It becomes mystical instead of logical, and that's where I stop trying to solve the puzzle.
And it bothered me the whole time that Calder kept the entire set of pentominoes in his pocket. They seem too big for that.
I agree with Erica on both points. I concur. Oh yeah.
Where is everyone?
I think Frog was in DC only because his parents were out of town so he was staying with relatives for the week. Right? I think it was just a ploy to get frogs in the story so that it would fit with Charles Fort's "existence in frogs" quote (to tie everything together neatly in the end) and Helquist could use frogs for the code in the illustrations. And, by the way, I'm so glad I didn't waste any time trying to figure out the pattern in the illustrations myself. I would have driven myself crazy, and it wouldn't even have been worth it. The Lady lives? Big whoop! Like we thought she would have been lost or destroyed forever!
Post a Comment