CCBC-Net Archives
Holes
- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
From: Megan Schliesman <Schliesman>
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 17:05:29 -0600
One of the things that is striking me as we talk about Holes is how many strands of thought we are following. We've mentioned the humor, the fantasty/fantastic elements, the folkloric elements, the imagery, the fun (a "fun" book!).
This morning Ginny Kruse reminded me of a question that was posed on CCBC-Net some months ago: Can funny books win awards? At that time Nina Lindsay replied that of course they can but that "I'd guess that really 'distinguished' humor is one of the hardest things to write," especially given that people's taste in humor is highly personal and varied.
Whether or not one personally enjoys the style of Holes, it is hard to lack things to comment on in its pages. Thanks for all the insights that you've shared so far. What else strikes you about this highly discussable novel, or about what others have said about it?
I find myself reflecting on John Peters' comment that, "Sachar has constructed his story so that it can be read as fantasy, or not, as the reader prefers." I think this is one of the tremendous things about Holes--you can enter it on the level you wish, and still find it both funny and moving. For me, the book was troublesome if I took it as "realism" because of the lack of realism in the ending (never mind the over-the-top warden and the entire situation)--I just couldn't believe that this high ranking state official could come in and take over at the end to make sure things were all right, and that Stanley's lawyer would be able to sweep Zero away with them. But of course I didn't have to believe it. Yet for a child reader, these final events may not be something they question and, indeed, may be something they find comforting, even as they know other parts of the story are indeed
"fantastic" (if not "fantasy"). So I think even indivdual elements of the story are open to interpretation as "real" or "fantastic." If you are a person who believes in the power of fate and destiny (and you don't necessarily have to believe in curses to believe in the others), you may find some elements of the story more reality?sed than not.
My own initial responses to literature are always rooted in the emotion. For me, whether a story is realistic or fantasy, it needs to be emotionally honest (if emotions are involved with what is happening in the text). If it isn't, I feel that readers are cheated. Holes resonated with emotional honesty for me. I sensed--and enjoyed the sense--of Louis Sachar pulling the strings of the entire plot, making things happen so that all would come together in a perfect fit at the end. But even as he pulled those strings on the action, I never felt him pulling them with regard to the emotions at the heart of the novel. For all the manipulating that is going on in Holes--wonderful, skillful manipulating--I never felt emotionally manipulated in how I felt about Stanley or Zero.
Megan
Megan Schliesman, Librarian Cooperative Children's Book Center School of Education UW-Madison 608&2?03 schliesman at mail.soemadison.wisc.edu
Received on Thu 18 Feb 1999 05:05:29 PM CST
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 17:05:29 -0600
One of the things that is striking me as we talk about Holes is how many strands of thought we are following. We've mentioned the humor, the fantasty/fantastic elements, the folkloric elements, the imagery, the fun (a "fun" book!).
This morning Ginny Kruse reminded me of a question that was posed on CCBC-Net some months ago: Can funny books win awards? At that time Nina Lindsay replied that of course they can but that "I'd guess that really 'distinguished' humor is one of the hardest things to write," especially given that people's taste in humor is highly personal and varied.
Whether or not one personally enjoys the style of Holes, it is hard to lack things to comment on in its pages. Thanks for all the insights that you've shared so far. What else strikes you about this highly discussable novel, or about what others have said about it?
I find myself reflecting on John Peters' comment that, "Sachar has constructed his story so that it can be read as fantasy, or not, as the reader prefers." I think this is one of the tremendous things about Holes--you can enter it on the level you wish, and still find it both funny and moving. For me, the book was troublesome if I took it as "realism" because of the lack of realism in the ending (never mind the over-the-top warden and the entire situation)--I just couldn't believe that this high ranking state official could come in and take over at the end to make sure things were all right, and that Stanley's lawyer would be able to sweep Zero away with them. But of course I didn't have to believe it. Yet for a child reader, these final events may not be something they question and, indeed, may be something they find comforting, even as they know other parts of the story are indeed
"fantastic" (if not "fantasy"). So I think even indivdual elements of the story are open to interpretation as "real" or "fantastic." If you are a person who believes in the power of fate and destiny (and you don't necessarily have to believe in curses to believe in the others), you may find some elements of the story more reality?sed than not.
My own initial responses to literature are always rooted in the emotion. For me, whether a story is realistic or fantasy, it needs to be emotionally honest (if emotions are involved with what is happening in the text). If it isn't, I feel that readers are cheated. Holes resonated with emotional honesty for me. I sensed--and enjoyed the sense--of Louis Sachar pulling the strings of the entire plot, making things happen so that all would come together in a perfect fit at the end. But even as he pulled those strings on the action, I never felt him pulling them with regard to the emotions at the heart of the novel. For all the manipulating that is going on in Holes--wonderful, skillful manipulating--I never felt emotionally manipulated in how I felt about Stanley or Zero.
Megan
Megan Schliesman, Librarian Cooperative Children's Book Center School of Education UW-Madison 608&2?03 schliesman at mail.soemadison.wisc.edu
Received on Thu 18 Feb 1999 05:05:29 PM CST
