April 10: Borne Thoughts V

[kinetic_elaboration]

Finally finishing my Borne thoughts.

My unanswered questions: Another critique I saw was that certain rules of the universe were only revealed last minute, in particular, Borne’s abilities: how can Borne just zap up Mord and get rid of him so easily? This didn’t bother me while reading to be honest, probably because I was ready to be done with the book and also because thematically, as far as overarching plots go, it was pretty clear to me that Borne would save the City by defeating Mord, and I didn’t care too much about the logistics of how that worked.

But I mean it is a good point.

The ending did seem to, if not ignore the previous rules of the universe, at least introduce last minute some wildly different information that did not seem of a piece with what came before. Yes, okay, it’s Weird, it’s supposed to be Weird, but it should still be consistent in some way. And maybe it’s more consistent than I’m giving it credit for being, and I’m the one who isn’t getting, is missing something, or lacks imagination.

 

The biggest mystery to me was what exactly the screen/mirror/scene was in the Company’s basement lair. The idea that physical items could be transported through some sort of magic screen seems to come totally out of left field to me. There are hints at an ‘alternate reality’ from Wick, and maybe the slightest hints that this is an alien world, per Rachel’s speculations. But like, what do those concepts have to do with anything here? I love a good alien, but this novel does not get better for having aliens. 

Much like Rachel, I wanted to say ‘well it doesn't matter anyway,’ but I’m not sure that’s a great place to land as a reader, especially in the climax/conclusion part of a book. It felt very hand-wave-y. I don’t even know what I personally want it to be, or think it is, other than just generic high tech…futuristic… transportation device. It seemed to have more symbolic purpose–the sort of vision one might lose one’s mind for, as the Magician did, and that Rachel is not seduced by, because of her inherent pragmatism and her recognition that neither as an individual nor a human is she ‘special’ or worthier than others.

There’s another possible explanation for this Weird Thing, which brings me to my last, seriously, thing I want to write about.

The point: I was going to let this one lie but it’s still gnawing at me. I found one multi-paragraph post critiquing, very seriously, the central flaw of the book: in that reader’s opinion, that there are no stakes. Rachel (and Wick) are only interested in continuing survival, and this motivation is insufficient as a driving force of the novel.

Well first of all, pure survival is absolutely a sufficient driving force for a novel. I mean you don’t have to like survival plots–I’m not a fan!--but they do exist. Many man-versus-nature and man-versus-man narratives are essentially about the protagonist Not Dying and that’s basically it. I mean: Deliverance? Pretty much anything in the survival horror genre? Various post-apoc plots? ‘I don’t like a thing’ and ‘this novel lacks a critical plot component’ are not synonyms.

But more importantly, this critique got me thinking about how best to think about the overarching plot. Because I also don’t like survivalist narratives, but I never thought that’s what this is. I think there’s an argument to be made that Rachel and Wick aren’t ‘just surviving’--Rachel is raising Borne; Rachel and Wick’s relationship is developing and changing; and Rachel’s past is being explored. 

I’m just going to concede that the main driving force here is ‘don’t die’ though. Because it’s true that Rachel isn’t generally striving for a better life here. One cannot always spare the spoons to do that, you know.

I don’t think the first question should be ‘why these characters now?’ with a presumption that these characters are of central interest. I think the first question should be ‘why this ecosystem now?’ In other words, the analysis should be place-first, not character-first. One clue that the universe is more important than the characters is that Borne is the first in a series of books all taking place in the same world (the same ‘verse) but following different characters. I think as an author he works in this direction a lot: you see it in the Southern Reach, where all 3 books in the original trilogy do tell one story, but focus on different characters; in his decision to add to the Southern Reach ‘verse years after allegedly finishing that story; and in the nature of the Borne-verse itself.

Why this place at this time, then? Because the City is in a period of transition: from the era of the Company (and presumably some sort of elected or appointed or, whatever, royal, governance not long before that…) to the era of civil war between Mord and the Magician. This novel is about the end of that civil war and the establishment of a stable environment, and the hints of the next era for the City on the horizon. That is a perfectly reasonable thing to write a whole novel about: two powers fight for control of an area and both are defeated. This conflict also serves a microcosm of a larger transition of the whole ecosystem from a human-centric to a biotech-centric society. That’s pretty significant, pretty monumental.

Why this story told through these characters? Because Rachel is the person who raised the weapon/biotech that would ultimately defeat the more significant of the two powers, Mord, and because Wick was integral to the creation of Mord in the first place. That vision of Rachel carrying Wick to safety while their respective monsters do battle above them? That’s the novel. That’s the central image.

(Oh and Rachel killed the Magician. That also happened.)

Anyway, I think I have finally fully exhausted my thoughts. I’ve also finished reading the Bestiary. I’m glad I read the book. I’m glad I finished the book. I don’t know that I want to go any further down the VanderMeer rabbit hole, though.