One of my first thoughts upon finishing reading Lucky was, "another unlikeable character? Two in a row?" I think I'm being a little harsh, but I found Gabrielle's character...lazy. And a little whiney, without actually expressing a lot of emotion, with the exception of her description of her experience modeling (9). There is also some expression of frustration with the new space in which she's living (15), because the space is a mess of half-packed belongings, but instead of empathizing, I found myself annoyed: if the problem was in her own personal space, why didn't she just fix it? Unpacking and organizing doesn't take that much time, and considering that she does not have a regular job, it seems that she should have plenty of spare time. The lack of money seems to be a problem, yet she lists all the things she's been doing instead of looking for a job (30), and one of them is looking at apartments. She is wasting time looking for apartments for Tom, who moves out of spaces immediately upon moving in. He annoyed me almost as much as she did. Maybe she's trying to express a sense of depression, that she's too discouraged to look for a job, and too low-energy or depressed to unpack, but going to apartment interviews and interacting with strangers seems to me to be a much more energy-draining activity. She's so concerned about money that she returns potato chips and soda for a refund after her class is cancelled (31), so I'm wondering how she affords to live in Williamsburg when she works four hours at a time for $15/hour.
Gabrielle is leaving San Francisco at the beginning of the second book (46), leaving me wondering where she got the money to travel, especially while paying rent in Williamsburg. Why is she traveling? Who gets to take vacations when they don't even work? Maybe the "fucking yuppies" or "stupid NYU students in their overpriced renovated luxury lofts" (34) that she and her friends ridiculed after not being invited to a party they were all creepily watching through a skylight. After that trip, she takes a break to go to upstate New York, where she wonders why she took the trip, what emails she might be getting, and whether she should eat out of boredom (54) and that storyline is dropped. Again, I found myself irritated by her character, her friends, and the story in general.
Because she stopped dating the strips, I felt lost when she was suddenly on Bedford Avenue selling comics (55); she was still upstate on the previous page. I appreciated that she started doing more with the background of her panels in this section. The tone of the drawings was much darker, as the street and background were largely black for the first time in the book. I could not help relating the sudden switch to a darker tone to the fact that she was working for the first time (besides the modeling). It could be that the space in the panels was previously so empty because she was feeling so empty, but that now there's something more, so the space is more filled, but it is hard for me to read it that way because my dislike for the Gabrielle as a narrator and character has tainted my perception.
In fact, when Sheila Bartok took credit for her work, I started to empathize and feel bad for her, especially when she is accused of being a "Sheila Bartok ripoff" (85), but I disliked her so much that I did not really care.
I appreciated that Bell's style seemed to evolve throughout the book and that her panels became a bit less text-y (or at least the print became larger). Her drawings improve a lot by the end of the book, and I can see the evolution from simple journal to actual stories, but the stories still fall flat and seem so random and disconnected that it is difficult to see them as a whole. UnlikeThe Impostor's Daughter, Lucky lacks the continuity to shape interconnected pieces into a whole. It feels like a lot of random comic strips thrown together into a book, with the only apparent reason being that they are all by the same artist.
I was initially irritated by Gabrielle and her angst. I had to step back, think back, and refocus. I think Gabrielle is lost in trying to find her way into adulthood. Yeah, she sidetracks herself quite a bit. Agreed. However, I think she does that because she is overwhelmed at what being an ADULT entails and rather than face that, it is so much easier to put it off for the time being. Believe me, I know people in their 30s, 40s, 50s and some 60s that still have this behavior.
ReplyDeleteMargot doesn't care how you feel about the character either, Darin. What she really cares about is the examination of the book through your intelligence. Can we go there?
ReplyDeleteSeriously, the idea is is to show how she makes her irritating. What is the set up in the narrative or the flow or the visuals or even the realization of the theme that makes this a response. What were her strategies? Can you show that evidentially. Yes, i know you can.
Margot, she's still skeptical.
e
Wait! Did Margot just call me out for something you said!? I was just passing through and now I'm going to call y'all out! It's just a funny book, people!! Bell is hilarious and this is all way TOO serious...sheesh. Just for this, Margot, I'm calling this my legitimate response to a post!
ReplyDeleteyeah, margot is muddled!!!
Delete"In fact, when Sheila Bartok took credit for her work, I started to empathize and feel bad for her, especially when she is accused of being a "Sheila Bartok ripoff" (85), but I disliked her so much that I did not really care."
ReplyDeletei just laughed OUT LOUD at this!!!!! and i also said to myself, "man, me and rhonda...we can get along." HA!
slash, i wanted to thank you for your last paragraph too, in terms of her strips not having continuity at all. like, if there's no apparent "narrative arc", what IS the thread that's going to keep me interested in reading, and not blow you off as a complete blah-ster? (that's my new word for blah hipster, hehe.) saying she's being satirical isn't enough for me, because i thought satire was supposed to be funny...womp.
Sorry I missed the "t," Margot.
ReplyDeleteI thought I cited enough examples of inconsistencies, dropped story lines, and lack of continuity above to explain the annoyance brought on by Bell as a writer and Gabrielle as a character, but let me try again now.
How does Bell make Gabrielle irritating? As I mentioned earlier, after taking one of the many apartments Tom rents in a very short time, the one she says means he won the apartment lottery (8), she whines about the room being a mess and the fact that she hasn't "been able to hook up the stereo"(15). Why isn't the room unpacked and the stereo hooked up? Because she hasn't done it. Why hasn't she "been able" to do it? Beats me. She's spending a lot of time looking for an apartment for Tom, who is seemingly what we would currently call a "grown-ass man," seeing that he owns a restaurant in Boston, and that he's very brave "to change careers so late in life" (21). She tries to help him and basically ends up enabling him, and in return, he accompanies her on a job hunt, ridiculing her the whole way, "So it's finally come to this. Walking around handing out your resume. I feel so sorry for you...This is so sad. Did you think, when you were seventeen, that in ten years you'd be applying for a job at Barnes and Noble?" (40) We see no moments of profound connection between Gabrielle and Tom, although he is present throughout the book. She tries to solve his problems to avoid her own and he mocks her when she finally takes action to improve her situation. I'm the only one who finds that irritating? This is a 2003 comic/graphic memoir, not an early 90's Richard Linklater film.
Why does Tom keep taking apartments he doesn't like? Knowing a lot of people who are forced to live in dangerous neighborhoods because they cannot afford to move makes it difficult for me to sympathize with Tom. Where did Gabrielle get the money to take over Tom's apartment? She has worked four hours in the entire book by the time that happens. First and last months' rent and security deposit was less than $60?
She fantasizes about sulking in a corner because she is asked to bring snacks to class. Sure, plenty of people of various ages behave like spoiled children, but judging by Tom's comment about her plans ten years ago, when she was 17, she is now 27 years old, which is a bit old for pouting in the corner, especially when she is a teacher; she's supposed to be an adult to the kids in her art class, not a little sister. She is concerned enough about money that she returns the chips and soda (31), but she is on her way back from San Francisco 14 pages later. What happened that turned her fortune around? How does she have money to travel? What was she doing in SF? We don't know, because she does not tell or show us.
Her friend, Miranda says that living in Greenwich Village means "you won't be able to cross the street without tripping over ten NYU students complaining about their trust funds...Brooklyn is where it's real" (18). What's real? A bunch of white, privileged 20-somethings who seem to barely work, if at all, taking over the neighborhood, one loft at a time? Are they superior to the NYU students because they complain about everything but their trust funds?
Gabrielle discovers a leak in the ceiling over her drawing table. Instead of trying to fix it, or even investigating it, she just moves the table (25). She doesn't have the critical thinking skills to realize that the leak is still a problem?
Brilliant and sorry to get Darin in there
Deleteyou nail it here!!!
The text tells us she is happy when Tom comes home (35), but the rendering of Gabrielle and Tom is so simple that they both have tiny dots for eyes, which makes visual expressions of emotions difficult. I have to take her word for her happiness, because I certainly cannot see it reflected in the artwork. Her happiness is short-lived because Tom is grumpy, so they eat in silence. Why was she happy to see Tom? Because he might distract her from the fact that she doesn't know how to make a skirt, even though she spent a lot of time "trying," but apparently not investing any time in learning? Because she walked 45 minutes to apply for a job opening that may or may not exist?
ReplyDeleteOne thing that makes Gabrielle and her friends irritating is what is missing. Do any of these characters have a profound connection to one another? To anything? An experience that makes a difference, an insight? Are any of them aware that there was a major event in American history in their city a year and a half before? Are they aware of the fallout from that event? Does anything outside their lofts affect them at all? How are they so insulated from the world? How do they live in a very diverse city and maintain a group of friends that does not reflect that diversity at all?
While Bell's artwork develops throughout the book, Gabrielle does not. The strips employ darker tone and are less text-heavy, but there does not seem to be a narrative arc. Maybe this is "slice of life" memoir, but it feels stale because the only real difference or development I see in Gabrielle by the end of the book is that she has moved to yet another apartment and she finally has a job. She is still out of touch with reality; she is seemingly unaffected by anything that happens outside her apartment or her workplace. She arranges her schedule in a way that allows her to pretend she lives alone (77). She has been so self-centered throughout the book that I question her reliability as a narrator when she claims that Sheila Bartok gets credit for work she was doing (83). She "pretended to be stern" (91) with the boys she was teaching when their great aunt appeared, instead of presenting her teaching honestly. The book ends with a fantasy about learning the appropriate French greeting. Again, the book does not feel like a whole. It lacks continuity, a narrative arc, and character development. To me, it reads like a random collection of comic strips, not a "memoir." There is nothing wrong with daydreaming and pretending, but tying that to something outside one's self, actually acknowledging the world could lead to some kind of growth, which is something I do not see in Lucky.
Apparently comments cannot be more than 4096 characters, so I had to split my response in half. Oops.
ReplyDeleteNow i'm thinking about the silences and the moments of withholding. You really got into it deeply and i appreciate it so much. I've got to say, i didn't expect you to come back to it, but so glad you did Rhonda. This is stellar.
Deletee
Hahaha! I seriously hate to make this so "not academic" but I was left feeling empty and that a huge sense on hypocritcal-ness was exuded throughout the book also. I mean who the hell moves around like that?! I agree completely when Rhonda suggest that what makes Gabrielle and her friends so damn annoying is that the story and their lives have no connection to anything real or even each other. Again I turn to my question in my initial post... What the hell was the point of this?!
ReplyDelete