Richard
from St. Louis is reading various anthologiesFebruary 1, 2012 - 5:08pm
i sent don the first batch, so in the mean time, keep talking about the book, and i'll post when i can. he's not online every day.
i will say that i liked KNOCKEMSTIFF better, but there were aspects to TDATT that i thought were very powerful, such as the bleeding log.
wickedvoodoo
from Mansfield, England is reading stuff.February 1, 2012 - 9:43pm
Seeing as the discussion started early I guess I should add spoiler warnings. Be warned.
I gotta agree with the people that are saying the ending felt a bit forced. Not to the point where it spoils the book, and I'd still give it 4/5 or 9/10, but those last 50 pages or so did seem a bit predictable. I find this to be a problem with a lot of crime thrillers and murder dramas etc though, it's too easy to predict the path of the main characters. The bad guys have to die, the good guys have to kill them.
And while this book has a lot more bad guys than it does good, did anybody not think from the start that Arvin would end up killing Bodecker & Carl? It was kind of obvious. I'll concede that Pollack surprised me with Roy, I thought it would have ended up being Arvin who got him too. Having the road-trippers kill Roy though, means essentially they proved themselves as the bigger baddies and so when Arvin killed those two he also killed Roy by proxy.
Like I say, didn't spoil the book but it felt familiar. I suppose it was pretty clever how Pollack connected the three stories up, but then again maybe that's part of the problem, maybe it felt too clever and as a result lost some of it's credibility?
I also preferred Kockemstiff overall. That book I would give 5/5 to. That was a perfect litle portrait of an ugly place. This book almost does the same thing, almost nails it, but I think it is trying to do a little bit too much.
A few little I loved though.
- The prayer log imagery. Crucified pets, zealous chanting, buckets o' blood. This was grim, and did a great job of showing how off the rails Willard had gone.
- The Arvin & the preacher plotline - Here was the true climax of Arvin's arc. Him deciding to avenge his adopted sister was so wonderfully well handled.
- The sense of desolation. If Knockemstiff was a portrait of ugly, stunted people, then this is a portrait of the lost. The good guys and the bad guys are equally damned, some just more so than others. It really is the Devil ALL the time here. The book does a great job of making the religious nut-jobs of southern USA seem like the worst people in the world. A well covered topic sure, but an effective one. God-botherers scare the fuck out of me. Pollack did it well.
Any one get a hint of Stephen King here? He loves his uneducated hick-from-hell characters. I got a bit of a similar vibe from some of the characters here to what I have gotten from King books in the past.
Chester Pane
from Portland, Oregon is reading The Brief and Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao by Junot DiazFebruary 1, 2012 - 10:03pm
@Pete: No, seriously. I am curious if he went to Buckeyes games and just what that older University experience was like from his perspective. Was it all business? Also, I was wondering if he was a full-time student who wasn't working at that time. The whole thing is quite intriguing, and I am not just talking about the movie 'Old School.'
@Richard: Uh, yeah, the image of the maggots dripping won't leave my head. But I just loved the moment when Willard comes up with his brilliant offering. Also, while I am on this topic, how do you manage school with everything else?
@Martin: I totally get the Stephen King vibe. I thought that quite frequently.
Richard
from St. Louis is reading various anthologiesFebruary 1, 2012 - 10:42pm
@chesterpane - i have no idea. i love to read, but i also love a good Justified and Archer too.
Chester Pane
from Portland, Oregon is reading The Brief and Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao by Junot DiazFebruary 1, 2012 - 10:59pm
So you watch TV while you read. Nice.
Pete
from Detroit is reading Red DragonFebruary 2, 2012 - 6:40am
Martin said: - The prayer log imagery. Crucified pets, zealous chanting, buckets o' blood. This was grim, and did a great job of showing how off the rails Willard had gone.
But, in the beginning how it developed, and how it was based in his love for his wife, it just makes sense. Even though, later when it's revisited, it's horrifying. We do understand how it got to that point. At least for me.
Chester said: No, seriously. I am curious if he went to Buckeyes games and just what that older University experience was like from his perspective. Was it all business? Also, I was wondering if he was a full-time student who wasn't working at that time. The whole thing is quite intriguing, and I am not just talking about the movie 'Old School.'
Oh, I knew you were serious. I still thought it was a funny question. Also a funny question that I'm wondering what his answer will be to.
Richard
from St. Louis is reading various anthologiesFebruary 2, 2012 - 7:22am
CHESTER: So you watch TV while you read. Nice.
Yeah. Multi-tasking. Nah, I read on my lunch hour, and don't watch a TON of tv, so that leaves time at night to read as well. Sometimes I wonder how I find time to WRITE.
PopeyeDoyle
February 2, 2012 - 7:24am
I generally agree with everyone (except that I had a more negative reaction than most to the ending). The imagery and storytelling were excellent. That's one of the things that I love about KNOCKEMSTIFF. Pollock has great storytelling abilities and a great flare for imagery, and that's perfect for short stories. But for me at least, I need more in a novel. A novel needs a greater purpose beyond the act of storytelling. It needs to have something that makes me turn it over in my head and really ponder what the story is conveying. The Devil All The Time lacked that. There was no greater purpose or theme to the awful (and creative!) acts of violence portrayed throughout the novel. The violence seemed to exist for its own sake. While there's some realist point to make with that, the idea is never fleshed out in any manner that hasn't already been done.
So, while I still enjoyed the novel and will definitely pick up whatever Pollock writes next, I still consider The Devil All The Time somewhat a waste of Pollock's abilities. I really do think he has a great novel in him and I can't wait to see his next work. (I'm also open, obviously, to the possibility that there was a greater point that just flew right by me)
Flaminia Ferina
from Umbria is reading stuffFebruary 2, 2012 - 9:15am
Maggots dripping! Maggots dripping and my book is lost in the snow inside a van some-fucking-where.
Flaminia Ferina
from Umbria is reading stuffFebruary 2, 2012 - 3:26pm
Sorry guys. I swear I'm not reading every spoiler.
(I can tell by the first line(s) in the posts if I can read further or not) I'M BADASS SMART!
Richard
from St. Louis is reading various anthologiesFebruary 2, 2012 - 6:41pm
Here are Don's first set of anwers:
1. From: PopeyeDoyle
I'm really interested in your take on the differences between writing a short story collection and writing a novel. What you found most difficult. What you found least difficult. What surprised you, etc. Just generally your process for each.
My stories tend to be short, maybe 9-14 pages, so writing something as big as a novel was intimidating. And nothing surprised me really; I knew it was going to be tough! I had a vague idea of the story I wanted to tell, but it involved several sets of characters and it took me a while to figure out a way to do that without completely confusing the reader. Another thing: it takes me maybe a month to write a story, which means I'm slow, but the payoff still comes fairly quick. The novel, on the other hand, seemed to take forever, but the end result was, I think, more satisfying, maybe just because I found out I could go longer.
2. From: Americantypo
A. You didn't start writing until later in life, after which you were able to pull from life experience. What kind of stuff do you think you would have written if you started in your early twenties and what prompted the decision to write in the first place?
That's a tough question. This would have been in the Seventies, and since I spent my twenties doing nothing but working in the paper mill and getting high, I really can't imagine writing during that time. In other words, I didn't do much of anything until I got sober. Sometimes I wish I'd done things differently, but you can't change the past.
B. What is the worst job you ever had and under what circumstances did you leave that job?
The worst job I ever had was working in a meatpacking plant in Greenfield, Ohio. I was seventeen and wanted to quit school, but my dad insisted that I had to have a job first. So I worked there for around 8 months and then quit and moved to Florida for a few months, worked in a nursery down there. I didn't eat meat for a couple of years. Really.
C. Your work has been compared to Flannery O'Conner and described as "hillbilly noir", etc. For fans of your work, what kind of books, films, etc, do you enjoy that we wouldn't expect based on the kind of stuff you write?
I have a real love for certain English women writers from around 1950 through 1975 People like Muriel Sparks, Barbara Pym, and Penelope Fitzgerald and . And I'd have to say that, along with McCarthy's Child of God, a couple of other favorite novels are Richard Yates' Easter Parade and Kazuo Ishiguro's The Remains of the Day.
3. From: Wickerkat (me)
A. Do you read and are you inspired by other authors that write similar southern gothic fiction? I was thinking of Ron Rash, Daniel Woodrell, Elmore Leonard, Flannery of course, maybe Cormac, William Gay, etc.? Who are your influences?
I've read and been influenced by everyone you've mentioned except Elmore Leonard. For some reason, I haven't gotten around to reading any of his stuff yet. Denis Johnson's Jesus' Son and Sam Lipsyte's Venus Drive also meant a lot to me when I was starting out.
B. With TDATT, I have to ask about the blood log and the sacrifices. Does any of that come from your own background, be it your family, or friends, neighbors, etc.?
There was an old man, very religious, who lived up behind us when I was a kid. He used to walk outside his house every evening around supper time and pray for a few minutes. Sometimes he could get loud, and if the wind was just right, we could hear him. Don't get me wrong, he wasn't crazy or anything, just very devout. Anyway, though he didn't have a prayer log or offer up sacrifices, I figure he was the seed for that idea in the book.
Americantypo
from Philadelphia is reading The Bone ClocksFebruary 2, 2012 - 7:40pm
Seems like everyone is chiming in on TDATT in regards to the last fifty pages, meaning, "the ending", and knocking the book down a few pegs on account of it. Before addressing that, I'd like to say that I loved the book, the writing, the characters. I read it in about a week and had not ripped through a book like this in quite some time. It was a pleasant surprise and I hadn't read his collection of short stories prior to this, so my opinion is not in the context of having read Knockemstiff.
So, the ending:
I liked it alot. I wasn't surprised that all the characters sort of ended up back in the same place. In fact, I read the last quarter with great fervor, expecting that somehow Arvin and Carl would somehow cross paths, and following that, Arvin and the Sheriff Boedecker would also close the chapter they opened at the beginning of the book. I would say in reference to the title of the book and its meaning, the fact that Arvin's first experience in leaving his home town leads to coming across a group of serial killers, and following that, coming to his home town only to have the sheriff that had found him decades ago now approaching Arvin in an adversarial context... well it just seemed pertinent to me that there weren't ANY good people from Arvin's perspective, not even the ones that used to be good (such as the Sheriff). Religious figures in particular took a real beating in this novel, looking either hypocritical or just damn foolish altogether for their assumed beliefs that things will somehow work out.
But the ending- some are stating it was obvious, that the last fifty pages was just going through motions we all sort of could see coming, even from first introduction of Arvin in the context of these other characters. I would argue two things in response to this criticism. One- that an ending is expected, or is not a surprise or a "twist", doesn't exactly devalue it as a conclusion. I think that has more to do with a reader's expectation that something else happen, a desire for some kind of shocking ending or surprise, Is the reader at fault for wanting a surprise ending? No. But to say "I saw this coming" as a criticism seems more inline with a reader's preference to be surprised by the way in which events unfold. I mean, lets face it- we ALL knew somehow Arvin was gonna take care of business with Sandy and Carl. He was the only character that was painted at someone capable of taking out the garbage, as he did with the preacher. And if Roy had made it back home, we figured it would be Arvin that would kill him then too, but this was a revenge that was taken away from us at the hands of Sandy and Carl.
Was it forced? I think when you know a group of characters intimately and follow them around and they somehow converge on this improbable point, its only natural to find that point of convergence unlikely. But then again, they all came from around the same area and the characters were hitchhiking. So its not that crazy to find all of these characters bumping in to each other like this.
And to my second point regarding the ending- if the ending hadn't been cyclical and tied up so many loose ends I think we'd all be here posting how much of a disappointment it was that Sandy and Carl weren't taken care of, that Roy never got the fate he deserved, etc. Quite frankly, I would have been PISSED if I raced through the last fifty pages only to have it end in some other random way. That Arvin completes his foray into a life as a fugitive through killing a cop in the same place where his Father had killed himself seems thematically appropriate to me for the simple reason that that prayer log represents his Father leaving this world in order to be with his deceased wife, and now, after multiple acts of violence, Arvin will have to disappear and go into the world all alone. He won't get to go back home, he won't get to start a life anywhere where anyone knew him. He has to leave his family behind him forever and go out in the world after having had so many awful experiences in his travels thus far.
So, I don't know. Predictable ending? My question to those of you who thought this- what about this ending that we all saw coming detracts from the overall value of the novel? Was the last fifty pages boring? Or was it frustrating that it didn't take any hard turns? But then, if that's the case, is that a matter of a reader's preference or can we somehow objectively criticize the novel for having these three different storylines line up as conveniently as they did? Like... was it unbelievable that this happened? Heavy handed? Forced? I think that would be an apt criticism, that of a suspension of disbelief. However I never really had that nagging thought that the things that were happening were just too good to be true. I never thought, "bullshit! there's no way Carl and Sandy would happen to pick up Roy AND Arvin". Both were hitchhiking. And both sort of fit the bill in one way or another to a person like Carl, (especially Arvin).
Anyway, I am rambling and will step back and wait for responses. PopeyeDoyle mentioned the problem of this novel not having a deeper meaning. I'm curious if anyone has any ideas to this, if they found the book to have anything beyond just telling a good story. Was violence used just for the sake of violence? Does Arvin represent anything?
Keith
from Phoenix, AZ is reading Growing Up Dead in Texas by Stephen Graham JonesFebruary 2, 2012 - 7:42pm
@aliensoul77 - You'll Knockemstiff in about two hours, so might as well buy both.
Americantypo
from Philadelphia is reading The Bone ClocksFebruary 2, 2012 - 7:55pm
Reread some of the discussion. Response to characters getting their own stories/books: yeah but lets say they did and we saw the events play out as they did in Devil All The Time and only had the single point of view- don't we lose the value of context by not having a variety of points of view? Arvin in particular seems pretty central in regards to connecting all of these storylines, so maybe he isn't strong enough of a character to carry a novel, he's certainly good enough have the storylines converge.
A novel about Carl and Sandy... I don't know, I think eventually it would just become gratuitously violent. Who do we root for exactly in a book about them? And say, again, we just show things from their point of view and they come upon Arvin and he's the one that kills them? Like, say Pollock wrote three separate books and their points of convergence are only clear upon reading all three back to back? That would be, admittedly, cool, but quite ambitious. Hell, maybe TDATT is just part one of a larger three part story!
Roy and Theo... I could almost see them getting more time. They were great characters and you almost wish you had more of what they went through in Florida. But maybe that's the point- you only get a taste. Under the circumstances of Pollocks' novel, however, it would be hard to give any set of characters too much time, otherwise the overall story would lose focus.
-Bill
wickedvoodoo
from Mansfield, England is reading stuff.February 2, 2012 - 9:45pm
@ Bill
Your defense of the ending is a good one, and generally you are likely correct. Had the seperate arcs not tied together at the end there then people would probably be complaining that it wasn't tight enough.
Sometimes though, I feel that getting murdered is a tame way out for a evil character. Take Roy, there's a great example. Him left alone in the world, companion dead, with no home. His daughter (who is the fulcrum for his sanity at this point) is dead without him even knowing it. It's a pathetic, miserable place to be and as a reader I think I'd have gotten more of a sense of the guy having gotten what he deserved if the 'road-trip' couple hadn't have killed him. They put him out of his misery. I'd have happily left that arc thinking the man was on a futile mission to save his soul by trying to make ammends to a dead daughter. The thought of what it'd have done to him to get there and find out the truth is a tasty one. That would have been a worse fate than death for him .
Though of course you are right to say a lot of it is down to a reader's preference. Personally I find a lot of 'realistic' murderer/serial killer stories to be painfully predictable. Give me a supernatural element nine times out of ten, it just opens up so many more doors for the author. However, while I levelled this accusation at TDATT, I will concede Pollack did a whole lot better than many writers have done. I still kept reading, was still hooked, and would still rate this book very highly. I did find the last fifty pages to be little more than a countdown to the inevitable though. Although I concede that had Arvin not done what he did, then it wouldn't have been The Devil All The Time, but rather The Devil Most Of The Time, Except When That One Good Kid Is Narrating. Which makes for a shitty title if nothing else.
And that is more than enough negativity from me. Generally I did really enjoy this.
I love how Pollack captures the grimy feel of Hillbilly life (or at least how I imagine it). This point is important to me, because as an outsider to American life, what I see of hillybilly culture is very filtered through the media and is rather cartoony and one-dimensional. Pollack doesn't do that though. He makes it feel grim but he makes it feel real. It's the little things, descriptions of surroundings, of food and other such 'comforts', little glimpses of tradition and culture that stop his account of these people just being a 2-D cartoon that whoops and holla's. Knockemstiff and TDATT both have this going for them.
Pete
from Detroit is reading Red DragonFebruary 3, 2012 - 6:32am
When I said that some of the characters could hold their own stories, I didn't mean the same story. I meant if he wanted to write another book and have the same characters.
Just wanted to clear that up. ;)
And, man, those answers were great. Some of them not expected. Don is like a man's man. He's the man that Cormac McCarthy would write about.
bryanhowie
from FW, ID is reading East of Eden. Steinbeck is FUCKING AMAZING.February 3, 2012 - 12:29pm
I did find the last fifty pages to be little more than a countdown to the inevitable though.
I agree. I think the ending felt inevitable. Instead of feeling like it was a conclusion that was obvious, it felt like the set up had to lead to that kind of ending. I had questions about how it would resolve, but I knew that the threads of fate had lead toward that point.
Americantypo
from Philadelphia is reading The Bone ClocksFebruary 3, 2012 - 12:28pm
I was very satisfied with his answers, particularly about his "last job". No meat for a year? That really changed the assumptions I had about Pollock as a person. I assumed he was, more or less, one of the characters in his book that just lived through all this stuff. But turns out hes just a normal guy, maybe even liberal, etc.
@Martin- Funny thing about this book- it fit exactly my exaggerated perception of southern, mid-western lifestyle. But I think that comes from watching so many horror films and the common trope of the isolated redneck family, like Texas Chainsaw or whatever Rob Zombie movie you can think of. Then again, I think every culture, particular sections of America, have a really ugly side to them that can be exploited. I live in Philadelphia and I really love it here, but I know to a lot of outsiders we're considered a really violent nasty city to live in (Killadelphia is the common phrase). It surprises me to hear people talk about Philly like its this place where all you can do is eat a cheesesteak, watch the Phillies play, and get raped and murdered. A lot of great boxers come out of Philly. Its a "tough guy" city, and we're generally assumed to be a bunch of assholes. I'll admit living here has made me rough around the edges, but I'm hard pressed to write about this place negatively because I feel so self conscious about ignoring all the good and honing in on the bad. Maybe I have to move first before I can write my Philadelphia fiction.
-Bill
Americantypo
from Philadelphia is reading The Bone ClocksFebruary 3, 2012 - 12:31pm
Which brings me to another question! How does Pollock feel writing about a place he still lives in? Does he get self conscious?
PopeyeDoyle
February 3, 2012 - 12:43pm
But the ending- some are stating it was obvious, that the last fifty pages was just going through motions we all sort of could see coming, even from first introduction of Arvin in the context of these other characters. I would argue two things in response to this criticism. One- that an ending is expected, or is not a surprise or a "twist", doesn't exactly devalue it as a conclusion... And to my second point regarding the ending- if the ending hadn't been cyclical and tied up so many loose ends I think we'd all be here posting how much of a disappointment it was that Sandy and Carl weren't taken care of, that Roy never got the fate he deserved, etc.
First, thanks Richard for conveying our questions over to Pollock. That's awesome! He seems like a cool, very self-aware guy and I like that. Can't wait for his next book.
About that ending...
SPOILER ALERT
My problem wasn't that I needed a "twist" ending. Nor did I want all of the individual strands to just fall loosely to the side. My problem, rather, was that the ending was contrived. It felt like Pollock had opened up all of these threads and then realized, "Oh, crap, I need to finish this all up." So he went through the motions, "Okay, this character has to kill this character, then this one has to be picked up and killed, Arvin's the good guy so he has to come out on top," etc. I would much rather Pollock have just eliminated some of the characters, saved them for a later novel, and had a tighter storyline throughout. I'm hesitant to say this because I really enjoyed every character (although Arvin got boring as he went along). But that's part of what a great writer has to do - separate the wheat from the chaff and focus the story on the critical aspects of it. The ending to me felt not only entirely predictable, but contrived and sort of dull. If there's no real question as to how the story threads are going to end, there's nothing to pique my curiosity and keep me interested. If the story had been more tightly woven, fewer characters etc, the ending probably could have been much more interesting and less fake.
Pete
from Detroit is reading Red DragonFebruary 3, 2012 - 12:46pm
Richard (this adds to americantypo's post) - Do people give you dirty looks after reading what you've written about their little town?
PopeyeDoyle
February 3, 2012 - 12:45pm
@Richard - One more question, sort of piggybacking off of what Americantypo asked - Does Donald ever worry that people who are not from that area might get a very negative stereotype of the people there based on his writing? It's something I've been struggling with lately - people using my writing to further their own stereotypes about the people I write about.
Pete
from Detroit is reading Red DragonFebruary 3, 2012 - 12:47pm
haha I think we're all obviously too concerned with what people think of us. Still interested in his answers!
Americantypo
from Philadelphia is reading The Bone ClocksFebruary 3, 2012 - 2:35pm
And if I can sneak one more question in- everyone says your a sweetheart, a really down to earth, nice guy, but you look like a real mean son of a bitch in your pictures. Did the publisher tell you to stop smiling in all of your author pics?
Richard
from St. Louis is reading various anthologiesFebruary 3, 2012 - 8:07pm
MORE ANSWERS. I sent off the new batch of questions, too.
From: bryanhowie
My question is: How many family members have yelled at you, "I can't believe you told that story! That's a family secret."
Man, that's never happened. Though a lot of my stuff has bits and pieces of "reality" in it--snippets of overheard conversations, somebody's old car, a detail I saw somewhere--that sort of thing, it's also fiction. Still, believe me, a lot of people in my town think it's based on facts without really being able to point out any specifics, which, I guess, is a compliment.
From: tcs26
There was some crossover in characters between Knockemstiff and The Devil all the Time. Namely the gas station clerk, though his name escapes me at present. Is this something that you plan on doing in future works? Akin to Faulkner and his use of the various inhabitants of Yoknapatawpha County.
Well, though I hope I can use some of the same characters in future work, I'm not sure I'll be able to make that happen. However, I will definitely use southern Ohio as the main setting. No sense in a hick like me crossing over the state line at this point.
From: chesterpane
Donald, when you attended college did you ever go to any keggers? In other words, how immersed, if at all, did you become in the University life? Or was it for you purely academic?
No, by the time I went to college I wasn't drinking anymore, which was really the only reason I went to college, something to fill up the hours. As an undergrad, I was in my thirties and working a job full-time at the paper mill. Then when I went to grad school, I was fifty and driving over an hour to get there several times a week plus busting my ass trying to learn how to write.
PopeyeDoyle
February 3, 2012 - 9:05pm
Awesome! Another for the next batch, please: There's been some debate on the boards about the efficacy of an MFA. I'm interested in his experience in an MFA program and whether or not he thinks it's worthwhile. What are the advantages and disadvantages to an MFA in terms of your writing?
Pete
from Detroit is reading Red DragonFebruary 3, 2012 - 11:06pm
Kick ass! This is almost cooler than if he posted in here. People are being more thoughtful how they're spending his time. And he's giving such honest answers.
Chester Pane
from Portland, Oregon is reading The Brief and Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao by Junot DiazFebruary 4, 2012 - 2:49pm
Popeye said:
Awesome! Another for the next batch, please: There's been some debate on the boards about the efficacy of an MFA. I'm interested in his experience in an MFA program and whether or not he thinks it's worthwhile. What are the advantages and disadvantages to an MFA in terms of your writing?
I agree with the awesome. Wow, that is interesting that Donald had (what sounds like) such a large gap between undergrad and grad school. What resolve. Inspiring really.
Yeah, I don't mean to beat the education topic into the ground, but I would also be interested, like Popeye, to hear how much Donald values that post-grad time. Was it a breakthrough period? Did he encounter any teachers who he feels transformed him as a writer? In short, would he recommend it or does he think there are alternative ways to skin the literary cat?
(I'm considering a sacrificial prayer log)
Chester Pane
from Portland, Oregon is reading The Brief and Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao by Junot DiazFebruary 4, 2012 - 3:41pm
Oh, and thanks Richard for playing middleman.
I haven't seen anyone bring up the role of humor yet (though I apologize in advance if I missed it) and maybe I am just a sick fuck (amend that to I am a sick fuck) but I laughed on numerous occasions while reading these books.
For example, Mildred and the rich smell of hog shit:
For years he (Hank Bell) had listened to boys and men talk about getting laid, but not once had any of them said anything about hog shit.
Her only redeeming feature (Mildred's) was the thing between her legs, which some had said reminded them of a snapping turtle.
Sled-footed Willie; a euphemism for a giant cock.
Whore bumps? Whatever these are on Carl's face they sound funny.
Of course the whole 'Models' thing.
Of course there is a shitload more (Roy wiping his face with a dirty diaper) but it is fascinating not to mention crafty how Donald manages to infuse that dynamic in the text so seamlessly--I think a mark of a great writer.
It also makes me think that he is one hell of a funny guy despite the dark nature of his work.
Any one else find parts funny?
bryanhowie
from FW, ID is reading East of Eden. Steinbeck is FUCKING AMAZING.February 4, 2012 - 9:32pm
Half the time I'm reading Pollock, I've got a smile on my face. He's got some wicked turns-of-phrase and imagery. He doesn't write for a punchline. I appreciate that. His humor seems to be in the characters and never a set-up for a cheap laugh. (Don't get me wrong, I love a cheap laugh, too!)
Question for DRP:
I was wondering if writing in the 3rd person throughout The Devil All the Time was easier or harder than being able to switch from 1st to 3rd depending on the needs of the story in Knockemstiff?
Were there stories in TDATT that you wanted to write in 1st person?
Tish77
from Central Qld, Australia is reading something different everytime I log in... Currently The Diary of a Young Girl by Anne FrankFebruary 7, 2012 - 5:59am
Am I the only woman reading this so far? I loved it! Beautifully grotesque... I will expand after further pondering.
Tish77
from Central Qld, Australia is reading something different everytime I log in... Currently The Diary of a Young Girl by Anne FrankFebruary 8, 2012 - 6:54am
Questions for Don
1. What else inspires your writing, eg. music, poetry, etc, other than books or authors?
2. Do you think that having the benefit of life experience makes you a better or more thoughtful writer?
And a little bit of praise - you are the writer I want to be! Thank you for giving us this gift!
Richard
from St. Louis is reading various anthologiesFebruary 11, 2012 - 11:35am
Here are Don's answers to the last batch. I sent him your most current questions as well.
from Americantypo:
How do you feel writing about a place you still live in? Does you get self conscious?
1. Answer for Americantypo: Well, place is very important to me, and since southern Ohio is really the only place I'm familiar with enough to write about in a convincing manner, I'm fine with it. At least I better be!
From Pete:
Do people give you dirty looks after reading what you've written about their little town?
2. Answer for Pete: No, not really. A couple of people who haven't lived in Knockemstiff for years and years seemed to be offended by the first book, but most of the people around here have been very supportive. Though I'm sure most of them probably haven't read it. Ha!
From Americantypo:
Do you ever worry that people who are not from that area might get a very negative stereotype of the people there based on his writing? It's something I've been struggling with lately - people using my writing to further their own stereotypes about the people I write about.
3. Answer for Americantypo: No, I can't worry about that. If I did, I wouldn't be "true" to the characters. Hell, just figure people would find something else to criticize and ignore it.
From Wickerkat (me):
I first heard of you, and met you, when you opened up for Chuck Palahniuk on, I think it was, the Snuff tour. What was that experience like? How did it all come about? Do you have any good stories from the road on that tour?
4. Answer for Wickerkat: The readings with Chuck were definitely a great experience. He's really a nice guy, for one thing. Too, I saw what it was like to be a bestselling author. I mean, most writers (like me, for example) are lucky to get twenty or thirty people at a reading, but Chuck easily gets several hundred. As for how it all came about, we have the same editor at Doubleday and that probably had a lot to do with it. No good stories from the road, other than staying up until 2 am waiting for Chuck to finish signing books.
Pete
from Detroit is reading Red DragonFebruary 11, 2012 - 6:36pm
Nice!
bryanhowie
from FW, ID is reading East of Eden. Steinbeck is FUCKING AMAZING.February 14, 2012 - 10:48am
Reading through the book this second time (still not finished), I have been noticing something I didn't realy catch the first reading. It's all love stories. Just one love story after another. Some of them are tragic (any love story, if taken far enough, is tragic, because they all end in death), but some of them are pretty sweet.
I don't know why I didn't notice it, since the story starts with a love story of a man falling in love at one look at a waitress (Willard and Charlotte), and then it's one love story after another.
One of the quickest, to me, is Arvin's (Willard's son), when he finds a dog. One moment he has a best friend, and then it's dead and crucified.
Of all of them, it's the crazy love of Willard that is the most powerful to me. Going crazy praying for his love and never abandoning it, going so far as to recreate the worst thing he's ever seen (the army man strung up and cut open) with a dog (which stands in for Christ on the cross here). Love so powerful it wrecks the man.
Which love story do you guys think is the most powerful or like the best?
Richard
from St. Louis is reading various anthologiesFebruary 14, 2012 - 12:19pm
^great observation, BH. i'll have to chew on that before i can post an opinion. leaning willard.
Pete
from Detroit is reading Red DragonFebruary 14, 2012 - 3:04pm
I shit you not, when I was reading the book - this was one of the things I meant to post. Then entirely forgot about it.
Your post, bryan, is better than I would have done anyway. And you caught the dog one which I didn't even think of.
I'll have to think on this too.
Richard
from St. Louis is reading various anthologiesFebruary 14, 2012 - 7:26pm
More answers.
1. From Wickerkat (me)
What are you working on now, what’s next for you?
I've started another novel, but really the only thing I should probably say about it is that it's set in southern Ohio (again!) and takes place in 1918.
2. From Popeyedoyle:
There's been some debate on the boards about the efficacy of an MFA. I'm interested in his experience in an MFA program and whether or not he thinks it's worthwhile. What are the advantages and disadvantages to an MFA in terms of your writing?
The MFA program was a great experience for me, mostly because it got me out of the paper mill (it came with a stipend) and I was around other people who were interested in writing for three years (I didn't really know any writers until I went there). I'm not sure about the disadvantages, but I would only recommend going to a program that provided the tuition and maybe a stipend. In other words, I don't think it's worth a hundred grand or whatever out of your own pocket. After all, learning to write is mostly about reading and sitting down at the desk and working at the craft.
[NOTE FROM RICHARD: now he tells me]
3. From Chesterpane:
Yeah, I don't mean to beat the education topic into the ground, but I would also be interested, like Popeye, to hear how much you value that post-grad time. Was it a breakthrough period? Did you encounter any teachers who you feels transformed him as a writer? In short, would you recommend it or do you think there are alternative ways to skin the literary cat?
I had great teachers, but I was a little hardheaded, I suppose, as far as taking advice. The ones at OSU didn't try to change your style much or anything like that if you didn't want that. But they were very supportive. I think it was a breakthrough period in a way because I had so much more time to write. That helped a lot. One thing writers (or anyone else, I guess) always need more of is time.
4. From Bryanhowie:
I was wondering if writing in the 3rd person throughout The Devil All the Time was easier or harder than being able to switch from 1st to 3rd depending on the needs of the story in Knockemstiff?
Were there stories in TDATT that you wanted to write in 1st person?
I really don't think it mattered much once I got settled into writing the book. At least I wasn't aware of it being harder. Still, I'd have to say that first person seems a little easier and brings an "immediacy" that's sometimes hard to maintain with the 3rd. Also, no, I don't think there were any stories in TDATT that I wanted to write in first person. When I began the book, I tried out 1st POV on several chapters and it just didn't work. I did the same thing with the stories in Knockemstiff; I'd try out first and third on each one and try to figure out which felt best.
5. From Tish77:
What else inspires your writing, eg. music, poetry, etc, other than books or authors? Do you think that having the benefit of life experience makes you a better or more thoughtful writer?
That would have to be music. I don't listen to it while I'm doing the first draft and maybe the first two revisions, but I usually play music after that, partly for inspiration, partly for attracting a rhythm. I listen to a lot of different stuff, but I'll end up playing certain albums over and over, to the point where I'm not really even aware of them being on. So it might be Johnny Dowd or Mozart or Chris Whitley or some pianist playing Radiohead or the Allman Brothers or R.L. Burnside or the Stones, the list goes on and on.
Pete
from Detroit is reading Red DragonFebruary 14, 2012 - 7:59pm
I'm stoked he said R.L. Burnside. Nobody listens to him! I love his music.
bryanhowie
from FW, ID is reading East of Eden. Steinbeck is FUCKING AMAZING.February 16, 2012 - 10:05am
Having just finished the book again, I felt the ending was just about perfect.
I really like how Arvin comes back to bury the dog. Of all the moments in the book where the characters do something for love (and I'm pretty sure there isn't a single moment in the book not motivated by love except for maybe the behavior of the Sherrif and the lawyer who owns the Willard's house), this is the one that really made me feel like the story was working with bigger themes.
When the boy goes back to bury the dog, he is now like his father. He has killed for justice (the preacher) and for survival (Carl) just as his father did during the war. Arvin has now even killed for love, maybe (that's part of the motivation for killing the preacher). So, he goes back to the log and buries his first friend, and sits there as his father once did with the gun next to him.
Instead of killing himself, he buries the past and moves on. This shows him doing the one thing his father couldn't do. He might have no reasons or places to go, but he has just fought a big war and survived. Arvin enters the story as the victim and, after killing four pretty horrible people, leaves it as the hero.
bryanhowie
from FW, ID is reading East of Eden. Steinbeck is FUCKING AMAZING.February 16, 2012 - 10:27am
If the prayer log was his church, where Willard fought the Devil, that would make the dog a symbol of God. When Arvin comes back, he takes down God from the cross and buries him with a symbol of the Devil (the gun). Essentially, I think this shows that Arvin has been won the battle his father couldn't: He beat the Devil.
By leaving behind God, he left behind the Devil. He had to put them to both to rest.
Pete
from Detroit is reading Red DragonFebruary 16, 2012 - 11:11am
I hope you participate in every discussion. I love how you analyzed the book. I suck at picking out stuff like that and you did an excellent job.
Chester Pane
from Portland, Oregon is reading The Brief and Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao by Junot DiazFebruary 16, 2012 - 10:24pm
Good stuff B.H.
Chester Pane
from Portland, Oregon is reading The Brief and Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao by Junot DiazFebruary 17, 2012 - 8:21am
Bryan Howie asked:
Which love story do you guys think is the most powerful or like the best?
Though it was probably the most twisted: Carl and Sandy. I also think it was the most developed relationship, so perhaps that's part of the reason. Sometimes I imagine what part of a book would be the most powerful if adapted to film and Carl and Sandy's relationship seems like it would make a nice centerpiece for the misery, degradation and dementia that TDATT represents.
@Richard: I don't know if you're still asking Donald questions, but I thought of two more:
Donald, how old were you when you decided you were interested in writing; was it something that was always in your periphery or did it suddenly dawn on you?
Also, you may have been asked this before, but are you related to Jackson Pollock?
Thanks for graciously answering all of the questions and we look forward to that next novel. 1913? Going backwards are we?
Richard
from St. Louis is reading various anthologiesFebruary 17, 2012 - 8:52am
yeah, i was thinking maybe we hit him up with ONE MORE batch of questions. he's been very generous so far. so, if you have any other questions, post them up now, please.
@BH - excellent analysis, really enjoyed that.
Chester Pane
from Portland, Oregon is reading The Brief and Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao by Junot DiazFebruary 17, 2012 - 6:40pm
In that case...I will get greedy.
Donald, you mentioned most of writing being 'sitting down at a desk and working at the craft' so I was wondering how you approach that personally. With pen/pencil and paper? Or are you more of a key tapper? Or both? Do you outline extensively or just go at it?
Thanks.
Fabio Deotto
from Italy is reading "Sunset Park" by Paul AusterFebruary 19, 2012 - 11:03am
Wonderful!
Here's my question:
Donald, I sincerely loved your book. I read it in the italian translation and I’ve just written a review that should be now published online. There’s one thing I noticed: the way you describe things that I think seems excessively harsh, even considering the story you’re telling. I mean: suits, objects, furniture, everything is constantly filthy, foul, dirty, rotten, and sometimes descriptions sound too heavy and - only sometimes – a little unrealistic . Is it a conscious choice? (forgive my english, and consider that it could be a problem of translation).
Fabio
Richard
from St. Louis is reading various anthologiesFebruary 20, 2012 - 7:15pm
okay post up your last questions, month is almost over, want to send hime ONE LAST BUNCH.
Covewriter
from Nashville, Tennessee is reading & SonsFebruary 20, 2012 - 8:58pm
I loved this book. These are some of the creepiest characters I've ever met, but I liked them anyway.
Chester Pane
from Portland, Oregon is reading The Brief and Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao by Junot DiazFebruary 22, 2012 - 12:45am
Especially Carl. I want him to take my picture. Well, depending on if Sandy got her teeth and that itch in her groin fixed yet.
i sent don the first batch, so in the mean time, keep talking about the book, and i'll post when i can. he's not online every day.
i will say that i liked KNOCKEMSTIFF better, but there were aspects to TDATT that i thought were very powerful, such as the bleeding log.
Seeing as the discussion started early I guess I should add spoiler warnings. Be warned.
I gotta agree with the people that are saying the ending felt a bit forced. Not to the point where it spoils the book, and I'd still give it 4/5 or 9/10, but those last 50 pages or so did seem a bit predictable. I find this to be a problem with a lot of crime thrillers and murder dramas etc though, it's too easy to predict the path of the main characters. The bad guys have to die, the good guys have to kill them.
And while this book has a lot more bad guys than it does good, did anybody not think from the start that Arvin would end up killing Bodecker & Carl? It was kind of obvious. I'll concede that Pollack surprised me with Roy, I thought it would have ended up being Arvin who got him too. Having the road-trippers kill Roy though, means essentially they proved themselves as the bigger baddies and so when Arvin killed those two he also killed Roy by proxy.
Like I say, didn't spoil the book but it felt familiar. I suppose it was pretty clever how Pollack connected the three stories up, but then again maybe that's part of the problem, maybe it felt too clever and as a result lost some of it's credibility?
I also preferred Kockemstiff overall. That book I would give 5/5 to. That was a perfect litle portrait of an ugly place. This book almost does the same thing, almost nails it, but I think it is trying to do a little bit too much.
A few little I loved though.
- The prayer log imagery. Crucified pets, zealous chanting, buckets o' blood. This was grim, and did a great job of showing how off the rails Willard had gone.
- The Arvin & the preacher plotline - Here was the true climax of Arvin's arc. Him deciding to avenge his adopted sister was so wonderfully well handled.
- The sense of desolation. If Knockemstiff was a portrait of ugly, stunted people, then this is a portrait of the lost. The good guys and the bad guys are equally damned, some just more so than others. It really is the Devil ALL the time here. The book does a great job of making the religious nut-jobs of southern USA seem like the worst people in the world. A well covered topic sure, but an effective one. God-botherers scare the fuck out of me. Pollack did it well.
Any one get a hint of Stephen King here? He loves his uneducated hick-from-hell characters. I got a bit of a similar vibe from some of the characters here to what I have gotten from King books in the past.
@Pete: No, seriously. I am curious if he went to Buckeyes games and just what that older University experience was like from his perspective. Was it all business? Also, I was wondering if he was a full-time student who wasn't working at that time. The whole thing is quite intriguing, and I am not just talking about the movie 'Old School.'
@Richard: Uh, yeah, the image of the maggots dripping won't leave my head. But I just loved the moment when Willard comes up with his brilliant offering. Also, while I am on this topic, how do you manage school with everything else?
@Martin: I totally get the Stephen King vibe. I thought that quite frequently.
@chesterpane - i have no idea. i love to read, but i also love a good Justified and Archer too.
So you watch TV while you read. Nice.
But, in the beginning how it developed, and how it was based in his love for his wife, it just makes sense. Even though, later when it's revisited, it's horrifying. We do understand how it got to that point. At least for me.
Oh, I knew you were serious. I still thought it was a funny question. Also a funny question that I'm wondering what his answer will be to.
Yeah. Multi-tasking. Nah, I read on my lunch hour, and don't watch a TON of tv, so that leaves time at night to read as well. Sometimes I wonder how I find time to WRITE.
I generally agree with everyone (except that I had a more negative reaction than most to the ending). The imagery and storytelling were excellent. That's one of the things that I love about KNOCKEMSTIFF. Pollock has great storytelling abilities and a great flare for imagery, and that's perfect for short stories. But for me at least, I need more in a novel. A novel needs a greater purpose beyond the act of storytelling. It needs to have something that makes me turn it over in my head and really ponder what the story is conveying. The Devil All The Time lacked that. There was no greater purpose or theme to the awful (and creative!) acts of violence portrayed throughout the novel. The violence seemed to exist for its own sake. While there's some realist point to make with that, the idea is never fleshed out in any manner that hasn't already been done.
So, while I still enjoyed the novel and will definitely pick up whatever Pollock writes next, I still consider The Devil All The Time somewhat a waste of Pollock's abilities. I really do think he has a great novel in him and I can't wait to see his next work. (I'm also open, obviously, to the possibility that there was a greater point that just flew right by me)
Maggots dripping! Maggots dripping and my book is lost in the snow inside a van some-fucking-where.
Sorry guys. I swear I'm not reading every spoiler.
(I can tell by the first line(s) in the posts if I can read further or not) I'M BADASS SMART!
Here are Don's first set of anwers:
1. From: PopeyeDoyle
I'm really interested in your take on the differences between writing a short story collection and writing a novel. What you found most difficult. What you found least difficult. What surprised you, etc. Just generally your process for each.
My stories tend to be short, maybe 9-14 pages, so writing something as big as a novel was intimidating. And nothing surprised me really; I knew it was going to be tough! I had a vague idea of the story I wanted to tell, but it involved several sets of characters and it took me a while to figure out a way to do that without completely confusing the reader. Another thing: it takes me maybe a month to write a story, which means I'm slow, but the payoff still comes fairly quick. The novel, on the other hand, seemed to take forever, but the end result was, I think, more satisfying, maybe just because I found out I could go longer.
2. From: Americantypo
A. You didn't start writing until later in life, after which you were able to pull from life experience. What kind of stuff do you think you would have written if you started in your early twenties and what prompted the decision to write in the first place?
That's a tough question. This would have been in the Seventies, and since I spent my twenties doing nothing but working in the paper mill and getting high, I really can't imagine writing during that time. In other words, I didn't do much of anything until I got sober. Sometimes I wish I'd done things differently, but you can't change the past.
B. What is the worst job you ever had and under what circumstances did you leave that job?
The worst job I ever had was working in a meatpacking plant in Greenfield, Ohio. I was seventeen and wanted to quit school, but my dad insisted that I had to have a job first. So I worked there for around 8 months and then quit and moved to Florida for a few months, worked in a nursery down there. I didn't eat meat for a couple of years. Really.
C. Your work has been compared to Flannery O'Conner and described as "hillbilly noir", etc. For fans of your work, what kind of books, films, etc, do you enjoy that we wouldn't expect based on the kind of stuff you write?
I have a real love for certain English women writers from around 1950 through 1975 People like Muriel Sparks, Barbara Pym, and Penelope Fitzgerald and . And I'd have to say that, along with McCarthy's Child of God, a couple of other favorite novels are Richard Yates' Easter Parade and Kazuo Ishiguro's The Remains of the Day.
3. From: Wickerkat (me)
A. Do you read and are you inspired by other authors that write similar southern gothic fiction? I was thinking of Ron Rash, Daniel Woodrell, Elmore Leonard, Flannery of course, maybe Cormac, William Gay, etc.? Who are your influences?
I've read and been influenced by everyone you've mentioned except Elmore Leonard. For some reason, I haven't gotten around to reading any of his stuff yet. Denis Johnson's Jesus' Son and Sam Lipsyte's Venus Drive also meant a lot to me when I was starting out.
B. With TDATT, I have to ask about the blood log and the sacrifices. Does any of that come from your own background, be it your family, or friends, neighbors, etc.?
There was an old man, very religious, who lived up behind us when I was a kid. He used to walk outside his house every evening around supper time and pray for a few minutes. Sometimes he could get loud, and if the wind was just right, we could hear him. Don't get me wrong, he wasn't crazy or anything, just very devout. Anyway, though he didn't have a prayer log or offer up sacrifices, I figure he was the seed for that idea in the book.
Seems like everyone is chiming in on TDATT in regards to the last fifty pages, meaning, "the ending", and knocking the book down a few pegs on account of it. Before addressing that, I'd like to say that I loved the book, the writing, the characters. I read it in about a week and had not ripped through a book like this in quite some time. It was a pleasant surprise and I hadn't read his collection of short stories prior to this, so my opinion is not in the context of having read Knockemstiff.
So, the ending:
I liked it alot. I wasn't surprised that all the characters sort of ended up back in the same place. In fact, I read the last quarter with great fervor, expecting that somehow Arvin and Carl would somehow cross paths, and following that, Arvin and the Sheriff Boedecker would also close the chapter they opened at the beginning of the book. I would say in reference to the title of the book and its meaning, the fact that Arvin's first experience in leaving his home town leads to coming across a group of serial killers, and following that, coming to his home town only to have the sheriff that had found him decades ago now approaching Arvin in an adversarial context... well it just seemed pertinent to me that there weren't ANY good people from Arvin's perspective, not even the ones that used to be good (such as the Sheriff). Religious figures in particular took a real beating in this novel, looking either hypocritical or just damn foolish altogether for their assumed beliefs that things will somehow work out.
But the ending- some are stating it was obvious, that the last fifty pages was just going through motions we all sort of could see coming, even from first introduction of Arvin in the context of these other characters. I would argue two things in response to this criticism. One- that an ending is expected, or is not a surprise or a "twist", doesn't exactly devalue it as a conclusion. I think that has more to do with a reader's expectation that something else happen, a desire for some kind of shocking ending or surprise, Is the reader at fault for wanting a surprise ending? No. But to say "I saw this coming" as a criticism seems more inline with a reader's preference to be surprised by the way in which events unfold. I mean, lets face it- we ALL knew somehow Arvin was gonna take care of business with Sandy and Carl. He was the only character that was painted at someone capable of taking out the garbage, as he did with the preacher. And if Roy had made it back home, we figured it would be Arvin that would kill him then too, but this was a revenge that was taken away from us at the hands of Sandy and Carl.
Was it forced? I think when you know a group of characters intimately and follow them around and they somehow converge on this improbable point, its only natural to find that point of convergence unlikely. But then again, they all came from around the same area and the characters were hitchhiking. So its not that crazy to find all of these characters bumping in to each other like this.
And to my second point regarding the ending- if the ending hadn't been cyclical and tied up so many loose ends I think we'd all be here posting how much of a disappointment it was that Sandy and Carl weren't taken care of, that Roy never got the fate he deserved, etc. Quite frankly, I would have been PISSED if I raced through the last fifty pages only to have it end in some other random way. That Arvin completes his foray into a life as a fugitive through killing a cop in the same place where his Father had killed himself seems thematically appropriate to me for the simple reason that that prayer log represents his Father leaving this world in order to be with his deceased wife, and now, after multiple acts of violence, Arvin will have to disappear and go into the world all alone. He won't get to go back home, he won't get to start a life anywhere where anyone knew him. He has to leave his family behind him forever and go out in the world after having had so many awful experiences in his travels thus far.
So, I don't know. Predictable ending? My question to those of you who thought this- what about this ending that we all saw coming detracts from the overall value of the novel? Was the last fifty pages boring? Or was it frustrating that it didn't take any hard turns? But then, if that's the case, is that a matter of a reader's preference or can we somehow objectively criticize the novel for having these three different storylines line up as conveniently as they did? Like... was it unbelievable that this happened? Heavy handed? Forced? I think that would be an apt criticism, that of a suspension of disbelief. However I never really had that nagging thought that the things that were happening were just too good to be true. I never thought, "bullshit! there's no way Carl and Sandy would happen to pick up Roy AND Arvin". Both were hitchhiking. And both sort of fit the bill in one way or another to a person like Carl, (especially Arvin).
Anyway, I am rambling and will step back and wait for responses. PopeyeDoyle mentioned the problem of this novel not having a deeper meaning. I'm curious if anyone has any ideas to this, if they found the book to have anything beyond just telling a good story. Was violence used just for the sake of violence? Does Arvin represent anything?
@aliensoul77 - You'll Knockemstiff in about two hours, so might as well buy both.
Reread some of the discussion. Response to characters getting their own stories/books: yeah but lets say they did and we saw the events play out as they did in Devil All The Time and only had the single point of view- don't we lose the value of context by not having a variety of points of view? Arvin in particular seems pretty central in regards to connecting all of these storylines, so maybe he isn't strong enough of a character to carry a novel, he's certainly good enough have the storylines converge.
A novel about Carl and Sandy... I don't know, I think eventually it would just become gratuitously violent. Who do we root for exactly in a book about them? And say, again, we just show things from their point of view and they come upon Arvin and he's the one that kills them? Like, say Pollock wrote three separate books and their points of convergence are only clear upon reading all three back to back? That would be, admittedly, cool, but quite ambitious. Hell, maybe TDATT is just part one of a larger three part story!
Roy and Theo... I could almost see them getting more time. They were great characters and you almost wish you had more of what they went through in Florida. But maybe that's the point- you only get a taste. Under the circumstances of Pollocks' novel, however, it would be hard to give any set of characters too much time, otherwise the overall story would lose focus.
-Bill
@ Bill
Your defense of the ending is a good one, and generally you are likely correct. Had the seperate arcs not tied together at the end there then people would probably be complaining that it wasn't tight enough.
Sometimes though, I feel that getting murdered is a tame way out for a evil character. Take Roy, there's a great example. Him left alone in the world, companion dead, with no home. His daughter (who is the fulcrum for his sanity at this point) is dead without him even knowing it. It's a pathetic, miserable place to be and as a reader I think I'd have gotten more of a sense of the guy having gotten what he deserved if the 'road-trip' couple hadn't have killed him. They put him out of his misery. I'd have happily left that arc thinking the man was on a futile mission to save his soul by trying to make ammends to a dead daughter. The thought of what it'd have done to him to get there and find out the truth is a tasty one. That would have been a worse fate than death for him .
Though of course you are right to say a lot of it is down to a reader's preference. Personally I find a lot of 'realistic' murderer/serial killer stories to be painfully predictable. Give me a supernatural element nine times out of ten, it just opens up so many more doors for the author. However, while I levelled this accusation at TDATT, I will concede Pollack did a whole lot better than many writers have done. I still kept reading, was still hooked, and would still rate this book very highly. I did find the last fifty pages to be little more than a countdown to the inevitable though. Although I concede that had Arvin not done what he did, then it wouldn't have been The Devil All The Time, but rather The Devil Most Of The Time, Except When That One Good Kid Is Narrating. Which makes for a shitty title if nothing else.
And that is more than enough negativity from me. Generally I did really enjoy this.
I love how Pollack captures the grimy feel of Hillbilly life (or at least how I imagine it). This point is important to me, because as an outsider to American life, what I see of hillybilly culture is very filtered through the media and is rather cartoony and one-dimensional. Pollack doesn't do that though. He makes it feel grim but he makes it feel real. It's the little things, descriptions of surroundings, of food and other such 'comforts', little glimpses of tradition and culture that stop his account of these people just being a 2-D cartoon that whoops and holla's. Knockemstiff and TDATT both have this going for them.
When I said that some of the characters could hold their own stories, I didn't mean the same story. I meant if he wanted to write another book and have the same characters.
Just wanted to clear that up. ;)
And, man, those answers were great. Some of them not expected. Don is like a man's man. He's the man that Cormac McCarthy would write about.
I agree. I think the ending felt inevitable. Instead of feeling like it was a conclusion that was obvious, it felt like the set up had to lead to that kind of ending. I had questions about how it would resolve, but I knew that the threads of fate had lead toward that point.
I was very satisfied with his answers, particularly about his "last job". No meat for a year? That really changed the assumptions I had about Pollock as a person. I assumed he was, more or less, one of the characters in his book that just lived through all this stuff. But turns out hes just a normal guy, maybe even liberal, etc.
@Martin- Funny thing about this book- it fit exactly my exaggerated perception of southern, mid-western lifestyle. But I think that comes from watching so many horror films and the common trope of the isolated redneck family, like Texas Chainsaw or whatever Rob Zombie movie you can think of. Then again, I think every culture, particular sections of America, have a really ugly side to them that can be exploited. I live in Philadelphia and I really love it here, but I know to a lot of outsiders we're considered a really violent nasty city to live in (Killadelphia is the common phrase). It surprises me to hear people talk about Philly like its this place where all you can do is eat a cheesesteak, watch the Phillies play, and get raped and murdered. A lot of great boxers come out of Philly. Its a "tough guy" city, and we're generally assumed to be a bunch of assholes. I'll admit living here has made me rough around the edges, but I'm hard pressed to write about this place negatively because I feel so self conscious about ignoring all the good and honing in on the bad. Maybe I have to move first before I can write my Philadelphia fiction.
-Bill
Which brings me to another question! How does Pollock feel writing about a place he still lives in? Does he get self conscious?
First, thanks Richard for conveying our questions over to Pollock. That's awesome! He seems like a cool, very self-aware guy and I like that. Can't wait for his next book.
About that ending...
SPOILER ALERT
My problem wasn't that I needed a "twist" ending. Nor did I want all of the individual strands to just fall loosely to the side. My problem, rather, was that the ending was contrived. It felt like Pollock had opened up all of these threads and then realized, "Oh, crap, I need to finish this all up." So he went through the motions, "Okay, this character has to kill this character, then this one has to be picked up and killed, Arvin's the good guy so he has to come out on top," etc. I would much rather Pollock have just eliminated some of the characters, saved them for a later novel, and had a tighter storyline throughout. I'm hesitant to say this because I really enjoyed every character (although Arvin got boring as he went along). But that's part of what a great writer has to do - separate the wheat from the chaff and focus the story on the critical aspects of it. The ending to me felt not only entirely predictable, but contrived and sort of dull. If there's no real question as to how the story threads are going to end, there's nothing to pique my curiosity and keep me interested. If the story had been more tightly woven, fewer characters etc, the ending probably could have been much more interesting and less fake.
Richard (this adds to americantypo's post) - Do people give you dirty looks after reading what you've written about their little town?
@Richard - One more question, sort of piggybacking off of what Americantypo asked - Does Donald ever worry that people who are not from that area might get a very negative stereotype of the people there based on his writing? It's something I've been struggling with lately - people using my writing to further their own stereotypes about the people I write about.
haha I think we're all obviously too concerned with what people think of us. Still interested in his answers!
And if I can sneak one more question in- everyone says your a sweetheart, a really down to earth, nice guy, but you look like a real mean son of a bitch in your pictures. Did the publisher tell you to stop smiling in all of your author pics?
MORE ANSWERS. I sent off the new batch of questions, too.
From: bryanhowie
My question is: How many family members have yelled at you, "I can't believe you told that story! That's a family secret."
Man, that's never happened. Though a lot of my stuff has bits and pieces of "reality" in it--snippets of overheard conversations, somebody's old car, a detail I saw somewhere--that sort of thing, it's also fiction. Still, believe me, a lot of people in my town think it's based on facts without really being able to point out any specifics, which, I guess, is a compliment.
From: tcs26
There was some crossover in characters between Knockemstiff and The Devil all the Time. Namely the gas station clerk, though his name escapes me at present. Is this something that you plan on doing in future works? Akin to Faulkner and his use of the various inhabitants of Yoknapatawpha County.
Well, though I hope I can use some of the same characters in future work, I'm not sure I'll be able to make that happen. However, I will definitely use southern Ohio as the main setting. No sense in a hick like me crossing over the state line at this point.
From: chesterpane
Donald, when you attended college did you ever go to any keggers? In other words, how immersed, if at all, did you become in the University life? Or was it for you purely academic?
No, by the time I went to college I wasn't drinking anymore, which was really the only reason I went to college, something to fill up the hours. As an undergrad, I was in my thirties and working a job full-time at the paper mill. Then when I went to grad school, I was fifty and driving over an hour to get there several times a week plus busting my ass trying to learn how to write.
Awesome! Another for the next batch, please: There's been some debate on the boards about the efficacy of an MFA. I'm interested in his experience in an MFA program and whether or not he thinks it's worthwhile. What are the advantages and disadvantages to an MFA in terms of your writing?
Kick ass! This is almost cooler than if he posted in here. People are being more thoughtful how they're spending his time. And he's giving such honest answers.
Popeye said:
Oh, and thanks Richard for playing middleman.
I haven't seen anyone bring up the role of humor yet (though I apologize in advance if I missed it) and maybe I am just a sick fuck (amend that to I am a sick fuck) but I laughed on numerous occasions while reading these books.
For example, Mildred and the rich smell of hog shit:
Half the time I'm reading Pollock, I've got a smile on my face. He's got some wicked turns-of-phrase and imagery. He doesn't write for a punchline. I appreciate that. His humor seems to be in the characters and never a set-up for a cheap laugh. (Don't get me wrong, I love a cheap laugh, too!)
Question for DRP:
I was wondering if writing in the 3rd person throughout The Devil All the Time was easier or harder than being able to switch from 1st to 3rd depending on the needs of the story in Knockemstiff?
Were there stories in TDATT that you wanted to write in 1st person?
Am I the only woman reading this so far? I loved it! Beautifully grotesque... I will expand after further pondering.
Questions for Don
1. What else inspires your writing, eg. music, poetry, etc, other than books or authors?
2. Do you think that having the benefit of life experience makes you a better or more thoughtful writer?
And a little bit of praise - you are the writer I want to be! Thank you for giving us this gift!
Here are Don's answers to the last batch. I sent him your most current questions as well.
from Americantypo:
How do you feel writing about a place you still live in? Does you get self conscious?
1. Answer for Americantypo: Well, place is very important to me, and since southern Ohio is really the only place I'm familiar with enough to write about in a convincing manner, I'm fine with it. At least I better be!
From Pete:
Do people give you dirty looks after reading what you've written about their little town?
2. Answer for Pete: No, not really. A couple of people who haven't lived in Knockemstiff for years and years seemed to be offended by the first book, but most of the people around here have been very supportive. Though I'm sure most of them probably haven't read it. Ha!
From Americantypo:
Do you ever worry that people who are not from that area might get a very negative stereotype of the people there based on his writing? It's something I've been struggling with lately - people using my writing to further their own stereotypes about the people I write about.
3. Answer for Americantypo: No, I can't worry about that. If I did, I wouldn't be "true" to the characters. Hell, just figure people would find something else to criticize and ignore it.
From Wickerkat (me):
I first heard of you, and met you, when you opened up for Chuck Palahniuk on, I think it was, the Snuff tour. What was that experience like? How did it all come about? Do you have any good stories from the road on that tour?
4. Answer for Wickerkat: The readings with Chuck were definitely a great experience. He's really a nice guy, for one thing. Too, I saw what it was like to be a bestselling author. I mean, most writers (like me, for example) are lucky to get twenty or thirty people at a reading, but Chuck easily gets several hundred. As for how it all came about, we have the same editor at Doubleday and that probably had a lot to do with it. No good stories from the road, other than staying up until 2 am waiting for Chuck to finish signing books.
Nice!
Reading through the book this second time (still not finished), I have been noticing something I didn't realy catch the first reading. It's all love stories. Just one love story after another. Some of them are tragic (any love story, if taken far enough, is tragic, because they all end in death), but some of them are pretty sweet.
I don't know why I didn't notice it, since the story starts with a love story of a man falling in love at one look at a waitress (Willard and Charlotte), and then it's one love story after another.
One of the quickest, to me, is Arvin's (Willard's son), when he finds a dog. One moment he has a best friend, and then it's dead and crucified.
Of all of them, it's the crazy love of Willard that is the most powerful to me. Going crazy praying for his love and never abandoning it, going so far as to recreate the worst thing he's ever seen (the army man strung up and cut open) with a dog (which stands in for Christ on the cross here). Love so powerful it wrecks the man.
Which love story do you guys think is the most powerful or like the best?
^great observation, BH. i'll have to chew on that before i can post an opinion. leaning willard.
I shit you not, when I was reading the book - this was one of the things I meant to post. Then entirely forgot about it.
Your post, bryan, is better than I would have done anyway. And you caught the dog one which I didn't even think of.
I'll have to think on this too.
More answers.
1. From Wickerkat (me)
What are you working on now, what’s next for you?
I've started another novel, but really the only thing I should probably say about it is that it's set in southern Ohio (again!) and takes place in 1918.
2. From Popeyedoyle:
There's been some debate on the boards about the efficacy of an MFA. I'm interested in his experience in an MFA program and whether or not he thinks it's worthwhile. What are the advantages and disadvantages to an MFA in terms of your writing?
The MFA program was a great experience for me, mostly because it got me out of the paper mill (it came with a stipend) and I was around other people who were interested in writing for three years (I didn't really know any writers until I went there). I'm not sure about the disadvantages, but I would only recommend going to a program that provided the tuition and maybe a stipend. In other words, I don't think it's worth a hundred grand or whatever out of your own pocket. After all, learning to write is mostly about reading and sitting down at the desk and working at the craft.
[NOTE FROM RICHARD: now he tells me]
3. From Chesterpane:
Yeah, I don't mean to beat the education topic into the ground, but I would also be interested, like Popeye, to hear how much you value that post-grad time. Was it a breakthrough period? Did you encounter any teachers who you feels transformed him as a writer? In short, would you recommend it or do you think there are alternative ways to skin the literary cat?
I had great teachers, but I was a little hardheaded, I suppose, as far as taking advice. The ones at OSU didn't try to change your style much or anything like that if you didn't want that. But they were very supportive. I think it was a breakthrough period in a way because I had so much more time to write. That helped a lot. One thing writers (or anyone else, I guess) always need more of is time.
4. From Bryanhowie:
I was wondering if writing in the 3rd person throughout The Devil All the Time was easier or harder than being able to switch from 1st to 3rd depending on the needs of the story in Knockemstiff?
Were there stories in TDATT that you wanted to write in 1st person?
I really don't think it mattered much once I got settled into writing the book. At least I wasn't aware of it being harder. Still, I'd have to say that first person seems a little easier and brings an "immediacy" that's sometimes hard to maintain with the 3rd. Also, no, I don't think there were any stories in TDATT that I wanted to write in first person. When I began the book, I tried out 1st POV on several chapters and it just didn't work. I did the same thing with the stories in Knockemstiff; I'd try out first and third on each one and try to figure out which felt best.
5. From Tish77:
What else inspires your writing, eg. music, poetry, etc, other than books or authors? Do you think that having the benefit of life experience makes you a better or more thoughtful writer?
That would have to be music. I don't listen to it while I'm doing the first draft and maybe the first two revisions, but I usually play music after that, partly for inspiration, partly for attracting a rhythm. I listen to a lot of different stuff, but I'll end up playing certain albums over and over, to the point where I'm not really even aware of them being on. So it might be Johnny Dowd or Mozart or Chris Whitley or some pianist playing Radiohead or the Allman Brothers or R.L. Burnside or the Stones, the list goes on and on.
I'm stoked he said R.L. Burnside. Nobody listens to him! I love his music.
Having just finished the book again, I felt the ending was just about perfect.
I really like how Arvin comes back to bury the dog. Of all the moments in the book where the characters do something for love (and I'm pretty sure there isn't a single moment in the book not motivated by love except for maybe the behavior of the Sherrif and the lawyer who owns the Willard's house), this is the one that really made me feel like the story was working with bigger themes.
When the boy goes back to bury the dog, he is now like his father. He has killed for justice (the preacher) and for survival (Carl) just as his father did during the war. Arvin has now even killed for love, maybe (that's part of the motivation for killing the preacher). So, he goes back to the log and buries his first friend, and sits there as his father once did with the gun next to him.
Instead of killing himself, he buries the past and moves on. This shows him doing the one thing his father couldn't do. He might have no reasons or places to go, but he has just fought a big war and survived. Arvin enters the story as the victim and, after killing four pretty horrible people, leaves it as the hero.
If the prayer log was his church, where Willard fought the Devil, that would make the dog a symbol of God. When Arvin comes back, he takes down God from the cross and buries him with a symbol of the Devil (the gun). Essentially, I think this shows that Arvin has been won the battle his father couldn't: He beat the Devil.
By leaving behind God, he left behind the Devil. He had to put them to both to rest.
I hope you participate in every discussion. I love how you analyzed the book. I suck at picking out stuff like that and you did an excellent job.
Good stuff B.H.
Bryan Howie asked:
yeah, i was thinking maybe we hit him up with ONE MORE batch of questions. he's been very generous so far. so, if you have any other questions, post them up now, please.
@BH - excellent analysis, really enjoyed that.
In that case...I will get greedy.
Donald, you mentioned most of writing being 'sitting down at a desk and working at the craft' so I was wondering how you approach that personally. With pen/pencil and paper? Or are you more of a key tapper? Or both? Do you outline extensively or just go at it?
Thanks.
Wonderful!
Here's my question:
Donald, I sincerely loved your book. I read it in the italian translation and I’ve just written a review that should be now published online. There’s one thing I noticed: the way you describe things that I think seems excessively harsh, even considering the story you’re telling. I mean: suits, objects, furniture, everything is constantly filthy, foul, dirty, rotten, and sometimes descriptions sound too heavy and - only sometimes – a little unrealistic . Is it a conscious choice? (forgive my english, and consider that it could be a problem of translation).
Fabio
okay post up your last questions, month is almost over, want to send hime ONE LAST BUNCH.
I loved this book. These are some of the creepiest characters I've ever met, but I liked them anyway.
Especially Carl. I want him to take my picture. Well, depending on if Sandy got her teeth and that itch in her groin fixed yet.