Layers and parallelism of influence tantalize the reader (5/5)
I’m no stranger to the works of Iain Banks: I’ve read six of his
fiction novels and all of his science fiction, all totaling twenty books. All
of his books (literally, all of them) linger in my mind with unique
storytelling. Though I love them all, I’ve only reread The Algebraist (2004)
and The
State of the Art (1989). Again, though I love them all, they are
difficult for me to synopsize, as if they are beyond the reach of my
circumspection. At the end of 2012, I read Walking on Glass and began to write
a review for the book when my laptop crashed. It took me a year to get around
to fixing the bugger and, lo and behold, all the files were intact. So, I knew
I had to reread this tantalizing piece of fiction.
Walking on Glass sounds quirky enough, speculative enough to
warrant the purchase and accolade of being chosen for my 100th book
of 2012. When opening an Iain Banks novel, I have never known disappointment…
slight dismay or mild boredom, yes, but never discontent. Walking on Glass
is the first novel of Banks to really push my mental envelope toward grasping
the linkages between the three stories. Only three stories, you may
guffaw, but the fictional distance and hazy parallelisms throw the reader for a
loop. Bear with it, absorb it, and try to relish the experience of being
challenged… something which 99% of today’s fiction has forgotten to do.
Rear cover synopsis:
”Graham Park is in love. But Sara Ffitch [sic] is an enigma to him, a creature of almost perverse mystery. Steven Grout is paranoid—and with justice. He knows that They are out to get him. They are. Quiss, insecure in his fabulous if ramshackle castle, is forced to play interminable impossible games. The solution to the oldest of all paradoxical riddles will release him. But he must find an answer before he knows the question.
”Graham Park is in love. But Sara Ffitch [sic] is an enigma to him, a creature of almost perverse mystery. Steven Grout is paranoid—and with justice. He knows that They are out to get him. They are. Quiss, insecure in his fabulous if ramshackle castle, is forced to play interminable impossible games. The solution to the oldest of all paradoxical riddles will release him. But he must find an answer before he knows the question.
Park, Grout, Quiss—no trio could be further apart. But their separate
courses are set for collision…”
------------
Story #1:
Graham has been steeping in the tepid water of love for weeks, fuzzily
reminiscing of his first encounter with the intoxicatingly beautiful Sara ffitch (“not one big ‘f’; two little ones” [97]), all
thanks to his flamboyantly gay friend Slater. Though not a typical romantic
first meeting, Graham tolerates her sour disposition after her recent
separation from her husband. Weeks go by and still he swims in the syrupy sea
of expectation with the lovely lass of Sara. Walks along the canal, visits to
the zoo, loving confessions over the phone—Graham plays the waiting game for
her love and attention. She’s not forthcoming with beginning a new
relationship, though she still sees and speaks of her biker fling named Stock.
Lightly laden with jealousy of Stock, Graham looks forward to later today when
he is allowed to actually entire the home of the hesitant vixen.
Story #2:
Amid the persecuting eyes of his sewer facilities managers and under
the duress of their hidden microwave beams which cause him to sweat and panic,
Steven Grout does the unexpected and quits his job. Fearing their reprisal,
Steven makes a break for it and heads to the unemployment office, where he
greets the receptionist and officer with a cynical degree of disdain because
they, too, train their microwave beams on him! Yet to qualify for unemployment
because of their sinister planning (or because of his voluntary leaving),
Steven leaves the office dodging hubcap laser beams, sugaring gas tanks, avoiding
his droning impassable landlady, and sulking with his well-earned money and a
local drunk from the bar. A man tolerating misfortune leads an insufferable
life.
Story #3:
In a castle made of illegible blocks of books, Quiss is subjected to
spend his days away from the Therapeutic Wars for his travesties while
attempting to solve two things: the impossible complexities of nonsense games
and the nebulous answer to the question, “What happens when an unstoppable
force meets an unmovable object?” Thousands of days are spent learning the
rules and playing one-dimensional chess, open-plan go, spotless dominoes, and
Chinese scrabble with his only partner in the castle—Ajayi—but his main focus
is exploring the depths of the castle and torturing information out of the
cherubic masked servants. Being imprisoned angers Quiss, yet several of his
discoveries cause him to question his reality and the reason why he’s being
used, punished, and borderline tortured.
------------
I love the respective quotes by The Times and Observer:
“A feast of horrors, variously spiced with incest, conspiracy, and cheerful
descriptions of torture… fine writing” and “Inexorably powerful… sinister
manipulations and magnetic ambiguities”. I usually disregard any sort of
benediction from other authors or reviewers on a book’s cover, but these two
hit the nail on the head, especially the bit about “magnetic ambiguities”.
It’s exactly these “magnetic ambiguities” which tantalized me
endlessly. Even when writing this review, bursts of additional insight are ricocheting
off my previous ideas, creating echoes of reinforcing understanding. Though the
book’s own synopsis says the three plot lines are “set for collision”, the
actual degree of crossover/influence/relevance/analogy depends on the reader’s perspective:
(1) superficial, (2) insightful and (3) metaphorical.
1. Superficial.
The overlapping of the plots of Graham and Grout is nearly singular, but the
resulting influence Grout has on Graham’s life is dramatic; what could have
been emotionally chaotic turned out just to be an emotional train wreck
instead. Grout’s action of physical sabotage ends up probably saving Graham’s
life but also nearly ending Grout’s own life. The storyline with the weakest
link is the Quiss plot. For a reader to disregard this entire thread would
dilute the book of most of its enticing perspectives; however, the books of the
tower can reflect the towers of books in Grout’s home, thereby providing a weak
psychological element between Quiss and Grout.
2. Insightful.
There are some scenes in each plot which focus on a commonality between two or
three of the plots: (A) tunnel, (B) books, and (C) game.
A. When “tunnel”
is used in each plot, the literal inference is a passageway, a way to gain
access to somewhere; this access into Sara’s home for Graham, access into
safety for Grout, and access into knowledge for Quiss.
B. Books are more
prominent in the Grout and Quiss plots, books as a prison and books as a
blanket, respectively, but Graham also has an affair with books—Graham sees
books as translucent windows into a soul, a superficial and inaccurate glimpse
in the end.
C. Each character
is involved in a game of their own, whether it’s obvious like the pointless
games Quiss is involved in, the cat and mouse game between Sara’s love and the
distance she keeps, and Grout’s vigilance against the vague powers of Them. Victory
can be seen as a chance at redemption (Quiss), a chance for love reciprocated (Graham)
or a chance at escaping Them (Grout); ultimately, victory is to reveal the truth
of their respective reality, in one form or another.
3. Metaphotical.
Adopting both the superficial and insightful elements of inspection, one last
attempt at probing the novel needs to be taken to understand the absurd life
which Quiss and Ajayi endure… and absurd is what it is, as Ajayi reflects, “What
the hell was the point of trying to rationally to analyse what was
fundamentally irrational? … [L]ife was basically absurd, unfair and–ultimately—pointless”
(129). At a deeper level, the absurdity they live in and the impossibility they
play with could merely be a fantasy experienced by Grout; he himself lives in a
world of absurdity and impossibility and this becomes clearer towards the end
of the novel after he is hospitalized. My own metaphor of the castle made from
books, you may ask? Well, it could be a metaphor of (A) knowledge and (B) experience:
A. Knowledge can
be manipulated, tested from theory to application, and it can stand as the
scaffolding for the way we understand the world. The higher part of the castles
walls are stacked books which Quiss sometimes destroys in frustration but the
minions of the castle eventually replace with another tome. It’s Ajayi who
takes these tomes from the walls in order to understand more of the reality she
inhabits, which opposes Quiss efforts to probe deeper and deeper into the solid
bedrock of the castle—that of experience.
B. Memories of
experience are often malleable from their onset but soon solidify into a vague
yet concrete sensation. Just as the tunnels below the castle act as a
labyrinth, so too are the cornucopia of experiences and memories we all have;
navigating each memory individually in chronological is impossible, which
parallels Quiss frustrating attempts to map out and understand the maze or
memories under the castle. Eventually, one memory (one room) provides an
impossible yet remarkably clear vision of reality and, of course, the
experience is addictive.
We nail together our
own scaffolding of understanding of the world based on our bedrock of
experience and the shifting, temporary glimpses of knowledge we all have.
However, those experiences can be false: Graham’s reluctant belief to trust
love at first sight and Grout’s delusion belief of Them trying to destroy his
life. Regardless of new information, the hopeless romantic will always be a
hopeless romantic and the conspiring paranoid will always remain a conspiring paranoid.
------------
Whichever way you interpret Banks’ novel, there’s always something more
underlying are laying parallel to your thought process. It’s like that nagging
shadow in your peripheral vision that’s never there when you turn around… but
you know it’s there. For a real wide-eyed, even more introspective look
at Walking on Glass, I highly recommend taking a look here after you’ve formed your
own opinions: (1) insight into how Iain Banks weaved in Douglas Adams’ The
Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy (1979), (2) the importance of color and
omen in the first few pages, and (3) the promise and destruction of resolution
to force the formation of opinion.