Mark Haddon has written a moving novel about love and bravery through the eyes of a British autistic boy. Christopher discovers his neighbor's poodle dead, impaled by a pitchfork, and, because he adores puzzles, he sets out to solve the mystery of who killed Wellington . But Christopher is autistic, a boy who doesn't like to be touched and cannot decipher emotions beyond the tools his teacher has taught him, and so the task requires the huge effort of testing rules and facing his own fears. A literalist by neurology, he deconstructs life into a set of mathematical equations and physical laws. This unique perspective makes him a good detective on one level, where clues and logic rule, but it also fails him on another, higher one because he cannot understand the magnitude of what he uncovers.
That Haddon was able to write a book from Christopher's point of view with all his quirks and still make him lovable is extraordinary. By necessity, the writing is simple and unadorned, but the language of details elevates it from the mundane. The insertion of mathematical puzzles and drawings add to the reader's understanding of how Christopher's mind works. Haddon's real skill is an understatement that allows the reader to comprehend what is going on even if Christopher cannot. Although Christopher cannot grasp subtlety and nuances, the reader can, and that's where the true force of this exceptional novel lies.
This short, easy to read book can be completed in a couple of sittings, although its impact will last much longer.
I think Alex picked this book because a dog got stabbed with a garden fork, rather than a cat.
ReplyDeleteOne of my favorite authors, Myla Goldberg, happened to provide a recommendation on the back cover of the book, which excited me. Like her first book, this book featured a child struggling to understand his parents struggles to stay in love. While Mark Haddon will perhaps be most known for accurately crafting a narrator with autism, the characters who will most stick with me are each of his parents.
I wonder if Christophers inability to portray to the reader his parents' emotional situations allows the reader to better bring them to life using their own experiences, imagination, and empathy. Maybe, but the observed actions of his father really portray a hurt man who is trying his best. And the mother is incredibly frustrating, because she doesn't can't Christopher, so whether or not you hold her leaving against her, her saying that if things had been different she could have been a good mother seems about right. She needed a normal child, got Christopher, and while she loved him (I think), it was too much for her. I am not sure if I dislike her for this or not, and am curious to read what other people thought about a mother who felt she wasn't needed and left.
One other thing, Christopher's best time at Minesweeper on expert was 99 seconds. Mine is 82 seconds (Giddyup!). This was the world record for a while http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQ9iEDMLZpw.