From: Linda Sue Park <dobbin>
Date: Sun, 08 Nov 1998 18:45:07 -0800

Thank you, Nancy Werlin, for a thought-provoking post. I agree that the choice of multiple points of view has advantages and disadvantages over more traditional storytelling. But it also seems to me that the comparison is not particularly useful. It's like asking whether firstor third-person is 'better'; any technique is an authorial choice, and the question for me is not what one gains or loses but rather the difference it makes in one's experience as a reader.

The standard for a story told in a 'traditional' manner is often the
'invisibility' of its technique. Critics use words like 'seamless',
'effortless', 'integrated' to describe a book in which technique and story are indistinguishable. But with Bat 6 and Megaboy, we have books in which the technique is actually a story element. Megaboy goes a step further, giving us visual aids in the form of graphics and typeface--more story elements.

If we as readers can 'surrender' the expectation of the 'union' of story and technique and thereby accept technique as an element--just as character, plot, dialogue, etc. are elements--then the experience of these books changes dramatically as we read. So I too found myself irritated initially while reading Bat 6--flipping back and forth to figure out who was who. But about a third of the way through, something wonderful happened. I stopped flipping. At first it was because I was sick of flipping. Then it was because the story was compelling enough that it didn't matter who was narrating the current segment. And while some of the girls sounded alike for a while, (they're all the same age and from the same community, right? Of course they're going to sound alike at one level) gradually their individuality emerged and I knew who they were-- not necessarily 'by name', but by character--and I realized that my need to flip back and forth had vanished completely.

It was a truly amazing experience for me as a reader--first 'fighting' the technique, then 'giving up' and only then allowing it to work just as any other well-handled technique works to contribute to story. Megaboy requires a similar 'surrender' on the part of the reader, but somehow it was much easier for me to make--perhaps because the brevity and graphic representation of each character's words was familiar in this day of media- induced sound-bites. And I say that not as a criticism--rather in fascination that a writer could take such elements and use them as a strength.

I am intrigued by the idea that the more 'direct' storyline plugs into our subconsciousness as readers; I'm not sure that it goes that deep for me! Rather, reading both of these books reminded me of a similar
'awakening' I had--when I read Joyce's Ulysses a long long time ago. And I think it likely that these books will stay with me just as that one has-?cause of their ability to remind me of the endless potential of fiction.

 Sue Park (compelled by the subject to de-lurk. Brief, belated introduction: I'm a writer with three middle-grade novels to be published by Clarion Books beginning next year.)
Received on Sun 08 Nov 1998 08:45:07 PM CST