Monday, September 17, 2012

No matter how many words there are, there will never be enough

I'm apparently on a kick of reading hyped books after the hype has died down and everyone has already read it. On that trend, I finally picked up David Levithan's The Lover's Dictionary.

The format is so original, but I'm sure you've already heard how it's set up like a dictionary, with the story slowing revealing itself through the definitions. You never get the full story. You don't know everything that happened with the rocky relationship within the pages. You don't even know the main character's names (they're referred to only as "I" and "you"). The definitions are in alphabetical order, you know, like a dictionary. Which means the story isn't in chronological order. Because of this, the book is interactive in a way. Sure, you're watching the plot unfold like a typical, albeit unconventional, story, but because of the structure you're trying to fill in the holes. A definition on page 132 calls back to a definition of page 18 that gives that part a whole new meaning. It's a book to read and re-read. Which is easy to do because you can finish this book in about an hour.

The format could easily get  gimmicky, but Levithan keeps that from happening. Maybe because the format fits in with the story. The "I" character is writing out his feelings about the relationship by using definitions, and it feels like he's writing it out for himself. Because of this and the fact that he already knows what's happened, there's no need for the story to focus on what happened when. Instead the focus is on what each word represents for the relationship, whatever the time

I'd gone back and forth on reading this book for awhile. I'd pick up the book, put it back, and then the next time in the store pick it up again. This time I finally decided to read it after reading the first definition. So I figured I'd share some of my favorites

aberrant, adj: "I don't normally do this kind of thing," you said. "Neither do I," I assure you. Later it turned out we had both met people online before, and we had both slept with people on the first dates before, and we had both found ourselves falling too fast before. But we comforted ourselves with what we really meant to say, which was: "I don't normally feel this good about what I'm doing." Measure the hope of that moment, that feeling. Everything else will be measured against it.

avant-garde, adj: This was after Alisa's show, the reverse-blackface rendition of Gone with the Wind, including songs from the Empire Records soundtrack and an interval of nineteenth-century German poetry, recited with a lisp. "What does avant-garde mean, anyway?" I asked. "I believes it translates as favor to your friends," you replied.

ineffable, adj: These words ultimately end up being the barest of reflections, devoid of the sensations words cannot convey. Trying to write about love is ultimately like trying to have a dictionary represent life. No matter how many words there are, there will never be enough.

And here's the review from Kerry at Entomology of a Bookworm that actually got me to want to read it.

Title quote from page 210

Levithan, David. The Lover's Dictionary. Picador, 2011.

Comments (16)

Loading... Logging you in...
  • Logged in as
This book was incredible. I'd have to say it's probably the title that held the most in the least amount of pages for me. I thought that the narrator never even used prounouns to indicate the gender of those in the relationship either. Perhaps he did and I missed it, but I remember thinking that after I finished. Definitely original and thought provoking. Glad you enjoyed it!
1 reply · active 651 weeks ago
I think you're right that there were never pronouns used, although I remember there being clues to the "I" and "you"s genders. Clues which I can't remember now, but I noticed fairly early on there weren't any pronouns so I spent a portion of the book trying to figure out what they were.
This is one of those experimental format books I cannot get into. Or at least couldn't that one time I picked it up. I guess I could try it again, but it seems not to jive with m'brain. THAT BEING SAID, I did enjoy the definitions you wrote out. And I am fond of David Levithan because of Will Grayson, Will Grayson.
1 reply · active 651 weeks ago
I normally wouldn't think I'd like this kind of book, which is probably why I picked it up and put it down eleventy billion times before finally buying it. But once I got into it, I liked. I still don't really know what happened with the relationship, but I don't think that's the point anyway.
This book sounds so interesting! I will have to check it out ASAP! Hopefully I will be able to stand the dictionary entries, but since you said it's a quicker read, I think I'll give it a try!
1 reply · active 651 weeks ago
It's a SUPER quick read. Some definitions are shorter than the ones I included above and none are longer than 2 pages (even those are rare).
I believe I have only heard good things about Levithan, and yet never read anything he's written. But this sounds really interesting and different and I loves it when stories are all mixed up and things (a la A Visit From The Goon Squad. Even though this doesn't sound anything like that haha!) So yeah. I shall remember this.
1 reply · active 651 weeks ago
It's a really interesting concept AND it works really well considering you never really learn what the full story is. You get bits and pieces, but really knowing everything that happened isn't really the point, so it's not like you feel cheated in the end.
I was skeptical about the book's format, too. I figured it would be too gimmicky to be successful, but I thought it was extremely well done.
1 reply · active 651 weeks ago
I feel like this could have REALLY easily become stupid and gimmicky, so it's impressive Levithan managed to keep that from happening.
I completely missed the hype on this one, so I'm glad you reviewed it! It does sound really good, and I'm a sucker for a weird format. Also, your title quote from that third definition, "No matter how many words there are, there will never be enough." Digitty dang, that's good.
1 reply · active 651 weeks ago
The format could have easily sank (sunk?) the book, but I really liked how he used it. Plus just picturing the play in the "avant garde" definition makes me giggle.
This is the book that kind of made me hate David Levithan... for a bunch of reasons. I'm pretty sure I'm the only one under the sun who disliked this book so much.

But you know, yay for you enjoying it! Different tastes and all. *high fives*
1 reply · active 651 weeks ago
Yay, high five for dif tastes!! It's what makes things interesting.

Haha I just re-read your review of this and I agree with everything you say (about it being slightly depressing, very few happy moments) although I think I liked all the parts you said. Maybe cos I didn't go into it expecting it to be touching and sweet. Def not the sweet part, what with the drinking problem and the infidelity. However I did think it was a portrayal of love, just not an ideal love. Cos there can be love an infidelity. or love and drinking problem.
I love this kind of thing when it resonates with the reader (and avoids the gimmick trap you've mentioned). I read a "novel" a couple of years ago that operates on a similar prinicple: Etienne's Alphabet by James King It purports to tell the story of a man's life (an artist, fictional, but I fell for it and Googled him) using the same format, an alphabetical life of significant terms, but as you've mentioned with this one, you have to read on to fully understand the implications of earlier "definitions". It's such a great feeling, isn't it, when you feel like you've assembled the puzzle that the author laid out for you (or at least grasped something of what the picture on the box would have looked like, even if you missed a bunch of pieces)!?
1 reply · active 651 weeks ago
I think the fact that you're an active participant in the story is what really drew me in. I'm not just reading about two characters, I have to try to figure out what happened. Etienne's Alphabet sounds interesting as well...

Post a new comment

Comments by