We Are All Geniuses

This book is already intriguing and confusing. There are parts where I cannot stop reading and others where I wish I did not have to read at all. And when I read the parts I did not have to, I read over them multiple times, because I want to understand what is going on. That is probably reason I like the other parts more, because even though I am still bit confused, I understand parts. Now to actually tell you what parts I am talking about.

First the Prologue, which seems like a mixture of the techniques Coover choses to use in this book. At first it seems like he is telling a different perspective of Jack and the Beanstalk. Then it turns out he is talking about his daughter and how fairy tales are lies. Since they really are. All they do is give gives false expectations, so when they grow up the world seems awful. When it’s just how it is. Then it skips to a weird perverted version of what seems to be Beauty and the Beast. Where it actually tells the story in first person. A very believable first person. The kind of First Person that has her own dialect and who is even not afraid to be too descriptive. Most of that part just made me think of bestiality. I was grossed out, but I liked that the author was not censoring a thing. I hate when authors censor their stories. One of my favorite writers, Chuck Palahniuk, is the kind of writers who loves to write because it gives freedom. Unlike all other kinds of entertainment you do not have to censor writing. "There are places only books can go. That is the advantage books still have. This is why I write," a quote from an essay by Palahniuk about his short story “Guts.” I think Coover is a writer who believes this as well, because he shows it in his work. Especially, in that prologue, because instead of starting off slowly he steps right into uncensored description. He also adds him some comedic values. My favorite part about the prologue is the last passage about Little Red Riding Hood. Mostly because it was about her thoughts as she entered her Grandmother’s house. Those were thoughts I had always wondered about myself, and the way the author wrote them was so descriptive that made me feel like I was in her head. Kind of like, I was her. That passage was the only one from the prologue that I actually understood. It kept me hopeful for the rest of the book. In in a way, it opens the door into Coover’s strange imagination.

Then “The Magic Poker” came along and I lost a little hope, but at the same time it was still lingering around there. In this story he is not afraid to make the reader realize that he is the one that made this place and that he can change details anytime he wants to. I loved that about it, because writers rarely even like to make their existence relevant to the reader. But I love how the writer gets so into the minds of the characters. I did find the structure of it confusing, because I was never really sure what exactly was going on. It reminded me a mixed up frog story. Although I do have two favorite parts: when the writer questions his own existence, and when the Carekeeper’s Son poops in a cup and calls it a love letter. They are my favorites because they were some of the oddest parts of the story. Since by questioning the writer’s own existence it makes him feel kind of god like. You know like you don’t know if he is really there, but he is. Writers are kind of like the gods of their own worlds. So it makes sense. Then the part about the love letter is so bloody obscene that I just can’t forget it, and makes me love it. It’s the strength about not censoring. You can’t forget the things that startled you, but you sure can try.

Then I absolutely loved “The Gingerbread House” because it was like the Riding Hood passage. It was basically, describing a classic tale in a very different way, and actually getting into the heads of everyone. It did not just tell you about the innocence of the Hansel and Gretel characters, it was showing you it. The writer adds in new elements, like the doves and the old man, to make the story much more suspenseful. Though I can admit I was confused a bit, because the writer did leave things out, but that only made me read on.

Kind of skipped “Morris in Chains” so I will talk about that one now. But I guess I skipped it because as I read I was confused. It was a hard read for me. Though I like how it challenged the idea of progression and modernism. Since on one hand you have the intelligent doctor who likes science and hates everything that is unexplainable. Then she as a name that rhymes with everyone else’s. Then you have an odd mythological shepherd that loves nature and parks. And his name also rhymes with everyone else’s. Ironic in a sense, because all the characters are quite different but they all flow together perfectly, like a rhyme. Probably has something to do with the fact that without mythology and classic literature we would not have modern anything.

Then the discussion opened my eyes on all the short stories, because it made them much deeper. Without it I would not have been able to talk about a lot of the things I did. And now I think that Hoover might be a genius. Since all these stories are far too thought out to be from anyone normal. Then again, I don’t think there is such thing as a “normal” writer. We are all geniuses.

.