Strange little novel. To me the development of the story seems as if the author is following a small, narrow trail that only she can see, ignoring everything extraneous to it. Or as if she is digging a narrow bore hole down into some material. The story hovers between a bare bones narration of both action and the characters' states of mind and thoughts. It is as if it all unfolds a bit randomly, without much care for background, believability or causal development. I really like it.
Not quite sure what she is doing with the story and her style, but I was captivated.
After listening to the reading group discussion of the book, I almost wonder if she isn't deliberately holding up a story as a mirror to us as readers. What we see in our interpretation of the story is a reflection of our predetermined perspectives, approaches, systems of literary classification. The author doesn't really give you enough in the story to really pin whatever it is you search for, to round out whatever expectations or interpretations you seek, so you are left with your biases/preconceived notions hanging in your hands.
If so, that is quite brilliant and rather unique...
I would like to read it again, to see if I can figure it out more fully. There is a Borgesian element (and I don't mean the little bits of magic realism) but I would have to look more closely.
