12 years ago
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
Is Mack Real?
When I read the foreword in The Shack it brought me to believe that Mack Phillips is a real person. I read the entire book in two nights all the while amazed that Mack was real. However, is you visit the author's blog he addresses this exact question and it is an amazing story. You need to check it out. As for the scheduled reading...good luck. This book is one of those you hate to put the bookmark in and go to bed. And yes, I am starting it again tonight.:)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
33 comments:
i thought you would fly through it.
Ash and i were the same way. I am ready to begin commenting but will wait for the others to finish.
but, tell me truly, did you have to suffer through the writing or was it more decent than you expected?
Yes. I definitely think we should speak up when we're finished reading. This is not one of those books you have to trudge through - a quicky, if you will.
Baker, the foreword! It's the Foreword that is (to me) remarkably, horrendously, and inexcusably poor-voiced writing, so I was surprised when the book took a different flavor.
listen, y'all, i got this friend around these republic parts that went and wrote himself a novel this past year. this past winter i helped him revise it. and now, after waiting in line for like four other hosers to read the final draft, i got my hands on the only existing copy of this book. not to mention, i got a schlew of folks lined up after me waiting. this book is over 600 pages. and i have to finish that before i can begin THE SHACK. i might be a little late getting in on this. i hope folks will just fly through it and write what they will, when they will. that's my humble rodential vote. i'll be coming in late next week with something concrete.
kelly - i also read the forward in a state of befuddlement. thanks for the advice to check the blog.
baker - will you be reading and writing with us? you best. i like your style. (ps. thanks for the new facebook profile pic.)
Baker: The forward or the book itself? I have to agree with Amber on the forward but, the ideas in the book itself was creative...
So, since we are discussing the foreword... (don't read if you haven't read).
IT SUCKED. Really, I was wondering if he was trying to sound like Mack's homosexual lover in the beginning, "if you know what I mean."
After the foreword, I had to stop. HAD TO! I'm going to attempt another run through Chap 1 tonight, "if you know what I mean."
I finished The Road the night before I started this book. Damn you The Road; your dialogue was too dope, and now I am stuck contrasting The Shack against you. If you are on The Road and see The Shack, don't stop walking.
BOO, Seth! It's too early to know if the foreword is pertinent to Mack's character.
Oh, and I love you better than all the banjos in the world.
Oh yeah, I forgot to say ''not that there's anything wrong with that.'' So... not that there's anything wrong with that.
seth - i love the "not that there's anything wrong with that!" of course, you have to say with a bit of a shrill.
it's tough to read anything after THE ROAD. i took two weeks off from reading altogther after that one. never felt that way again about anything else by mccarthy.
I'm sorry for Booing my husband right out in the broad daylight of bright shiny blog world.
The head-hole of my gentle, quiet spirit got to small - hardly fits anymore.
i just wanted to comment on here to boo at seth too, not that i'm just following the crowd, and not that there is anything wrong with THAT.
i was actually talking, Kelly, about whether you thought the writing of the entire book was poor, or if it was believed that there was a coarse difference between the forward and the story itself.
Amber and i had talked about it some, but i personally had no problem reading and even enjoying the way the book was written.
however, i did not, and for this exact reason, never read forwards and only sometimes read them after i have read the book.
...i feel like forwards always have the ability to skew your ideas and beliefs before you even get started, you either get hyped up and are let down, or you loathe what is before you and are less motivated to trudge through when you start.
they should call it a 'bias starter' instead of a forward.
hamster:
oh, i'm gonna bring somethin.
After reading all your posts, am I correct to conclude that I am the only one to have finished both THE ROAD and THE SHACK? If so let me tell you that they should not be read on the level. I realize that we are not ready to disect THE ROAD yet so I will wait paitently, but I will say that it is brillant. THE SHACK needs to be appreciated for its ideas (that Kelley righly calls creative), its viewpoint, and for Papa, not for its breakthrough literary style. Its not bad...in fact it is alot better than most christian literature written in the last...oh when did CS Lewis die?...but it is not to be appreciated solely on its literary strength. I'll come back to talk specifics with you when its all read.
And Kevin, I envisioned a version of Latonya's mom (whom I've never met, but can only imagine) as Papa. Someone older, but with her laugh, smile and joy. Read it and tell me if I'm way off...
mrs. brock -
"it is alot better than most christian literature written in the last...oh when did CS Lewis die?..."
saucy. i love it! precisely why one of my first questions about joining this site was "will ashley brock be there?" your brilliance makes me laugh aloud. this line goes in my quote book.
as for latonya and her mama - you're absolutely right: somebody needs to carve that laughter into stone or words. the world would be a better place if breezes sounded like my wife laughing. she is pretty.
Oh goodness. Are we allowed to bash the writing in The Shack and marvel at the writing in The Road? Because I want to be part of that.
If I were a book-burner, I would burn the first 35 pages or so of The Shack. I don't think it's necessary, and the writing can really turn you off before you get to all the interesting concepts and stuff. But then you also have to dredge through some terribly painful dialogue.
i wouldn't be so quick to bash the writing for several reasons.
first, there are millions upon millions of books with much poorer writing that you wouldn't dare pickup let alone read.
second, there is a difference between poor writing and basic writing, just like a difference between poetic writing and straight-forward writing.
For example, if i were to read the chronicles of narnia (without being appreciative of the religious undertones), i might say to myself, "man, this is really not that great." And, if i'm going for poetic or creativeness of writing (not characters or plot), then i wouldn't like it as much as something deeper.
However, i also have read nearly all of Clive's theological stuff and that mess is thick and composed in genius. The elegance, i think comes in his ability to write on the same level as not only the story itself, but also his intended audience.
Now, i have nothing else to read that i know of by the man who wrote the shack, so maybe this is all he's got. But, i think that if it was written in even the same style as The Road, then it would not have been what it is.
I think it even needed to be written like this to give it a sense as if it was written by the common person having an extraordinary experience.
I also feel that the most positive aspects of this book revolve around the characters and not the writing. However, one benefit it has is being comprised of an easy to follow format which nearly all readers can immerse themselves with ease.
Again, i did not read the forward and have about 100 reasons why i think that 90% fo the time they are useless, and even more often give a false impression of what is to follow.
this all sounded negative, so i apologize.
i should also mention that i, the baker, am in fact William P. Young, author of the shack.
I must offer counterpoint to 2 of Baker's comments. Nicole, you better get my back...
Point:
"first, there are millions upon millions of books with much poorer writing that you wouldn't dare pickup let alone read."
Counterpoint:
There are millions upon millions of poor lawyers, but when my case was on the line, that wouldn't excuse me having a merely mediocre one.
Point:
"second, there is a difference between poor writing and basic writing, just like a difference between poetic writing and straight-forward writing.
For example, if i were to read the chronicles of narnia (without being appreciative of the religious undertones), i might say to myself, 'man, this is really not that great.'"
Counterpoint:
I am reading Prince Caspian with my son right now. The writing is straight-forward and also very good, literarily speaking. The dialogue flows well, and there are no wasted words (say, like, The Road?). Although I won't talk about the concepts, I have found the first 20 pages (and the foreword) to be a whole lot of talkin' without saying nuthin. I don't appreciate authors who waste my time (I actually need to remember that for my future writings...).
Brock, I have to part ways with you here and go with my dear friend Nic.
do what you must friend, although i hardly understand how counterpoint 1 was even a decent rebuttal.
Again, your arguement with going 20pages and saying nothing is an argument about substance, not writing ability. Also, i might add, at least half of the great authors do exactly that, spend countless pages describing something that need not be described for 20 pages: ie...dostoevsky. (whom i happen to enjoy)
lastly, if you are only 20 pages into the shack, then you should hold your tongue, for it will change. most fiction books take awhile to build the plot just as sure as i don't bother to capitalize proper nouns when i blog or the beginning of my sentences.
IF the author said," Mack is at a cabin by himself, he walks out and busts his ass on the ground after finding an anonymous letter and is frustrated that it alludes to a place he has much angst over.." THAT would be bad writing. It seem to me that spending time explaining and describing things is exactly what decent writers do.
Am i wrong?
am i destined to be alone in this or is everyone just to shy to speak against the masses?
PS: (Seth especially)
there are better books than the road, and The old man and the sea is still my favorite Hemingway book because the sun also rises deals with bull-fighting which Hemingway personally loved and i personally feel is despicable.
have you seen that crap and what they do to those bulls?
It was easier for me to read and enjoy The Shack knowing that Mr. Young isn't (wasn't?) a professional writer. He wrote it as a gift to his family, who encouraged him to get it published. So the poor writing, I guess I can't hold that against him, and it's not fair to compare him to McCarthy because they're in different leagues (Young representing one of my high school students and McCarthy representing awesomeness). But that doesn't change the fact the writing is hard to handle, and the beginning is sucky.
Baker Man, you say "saying nothing is an argument about substance, not writing ability." I don't think you can easily separate the two. The nothingness at the beginning was filled with cliches and crappy dialogue, which is a product of poor writing, which contributed to the lack of substance. It also felt unbelievable to me, in a way that made me not fully grasp his pain, which is why I also felt the beginning was unnecessary. It just didn't do much for me (but maybe that's just me). Good writers are good observers and being observant will give your writing substance.
Frankly, there's plenty of positive stuff to say about the concepts he presents, and he absolutely made me rethink things regarding my faith. But it is just so hard for me to overlook the writing. I will always recommend this book with a huge disclaimer.
Baker,
It is a comment on bad writing. Unfortunately, I can't single out every very poorly written sentence because many have not read through the first 20. I don't want to drop the spoiler in here. Don't worry, I'll drop a dark side post wherein I set forth every overstatement that really did nothing more than make me roll my eyes.
And, my first comment is valid. Just because there are poorer whatevers out there, doesn't justify the mediocre.
And if you don't like Sun Also, you don't appreciate quite possibly the finest American Novel ever written. I find your lack of aficion disturbing.
And, Shawshank Redemption didn't change my life because it was pretty predictable and my marriage doesn't suck (you know what I'm saying Brockersnot).
All this notwithstanding, I generally agree with your artistic opinions, but we must part ways here.
Don't worry all I will separate my lack of connection with the writings when it is time to start talking ideas. I can do it.
nicole:
i can't argue with a person's opinions, and if you didn't feel anything while reading it, then i can see where you are coming from.
I think my shouting into the crowd is my experience with reading terribly written books, a category that the shack is in fact far from.
Seth:
i'm sorry buddy, but this book in it's entirety is not mediocre. It may not be great, but it is far from common, it is one of the only contemporary christian fiction books that i would recommend others reading, and maybe not for the writing ability, but because it is worth it for other reasons.
i never said your marraige sucks, i don't think i did anyways.
Shawshank is superior to Braveheart for several reasons and my father can beat up your father without even touching him.
lastly, next chance you get, go into any bookstore, whether it be barnes and noble or a used one and pick up 10 random books. i bet that the shack would be better than over half of them if you compare plot, character development, themes, symbolism, flow, style, and yes even writing composition.
now imagine all the books that are good enough to get published but you can't find anywhere except on the internet...
this book isn't terrible, so give up your dirty lawyer talk, and realize that i bought buffalo trace today for your next visit.
That being said, in all honesty i mostly agree with everyone else; it's not the best stuff, but not something i would consider burning either.
since i have been on a box already, i'll just go ahead and say that i think it is somewhat unfair for Mr. Young to be scoffed at for his writing ability, and then over on the other side where john eldridge's "wild at heart" is hailed as brilliant literature.
i am not for burning books, but after reading that book, even thinking about it makes me have a farienhiet 451 feeling and i don't mean as the protagonist.
i also think it should be said that comparing any christian fiction with secular fiction is difficult in that the subject matter (religious) for Mr. Young is monumentally more difficult to pull off in a creative and non-cheesy way.
nicole, i like your words, keep that stuff coming.
seth, you could maybe not talk so much.
amber and kevin and my wife and others need to talk more, particularly so i don't have to represent myself.
Yeppers. Enough of all that. Most of us haven't even finished the book, so it is unfair, not only to Mr. Young but also to those of us who are trying to read without any overshadowing influences. Also, I totally started the banter about the foreword. Sorry about that.
We'll be talking about ideas very soon. I can't wait to hear from everybody. These guys are the chummiest of all chums. I'm sure they'll make us all want to barf very soon for how much they love each other.
Nicole, you're foreally awesome.
You buy the Trace? I declare the Shack as the single most influential piece of Christian literature I have ever read!
Shawshank really was great. I actually cried (no lie).
Agreed about other Christian literature...
Agreed about Ashes, Nic, Kevin, Amber, etc. Other's should jump in too.
I comment no more until I get to page 60. And only then if I have something constructive to add to the discussion.
EVERYBODY LISTEN TO ME!!! EVERYBODY, COME LISTEN TO HOW BRILLIANT I AM!!!
1.) as for the debate above betwixt the three gunslingers: seth and amber are right; baker is auditioning for a full-time editorial position with RELEVANT magazine.
2.) i just finished chapter two last night after an anti-interpol laws showing of HEAT at a friend's house. do not watch HEAT and then read THE SHACK. you'll be looking for val kilmer on every page. val kilmer is hot, kinda.
3.) i like that nan in the book calls God "Papa" - and i like that this irks mack. that's nice. that's real nice. i love God. i love God a lot. but, like most humans, i have waves and spells where my humanity seems to overshadow my need or desire for salvation. there are days i think, what i really want here is a good whiskey bender and some nasty self-loathing. and in those moments i hear my wife in the other room singing to God or praying in the spirit or whispering her bible outloud, and right then i feel mack's sense of irking towards "Papa." my wife's joy in the Lord shines a big light into my own spirit, exposing my humanity and my need to draw near to God in a moment i most want to draw away. and that detail of mack - more than any other so far - has made him a character i can follow with equal parts intimacy (for where mack and i are similar) and forgiveness (for where young doesn't represent mack as i would have liked).
4.) i am using a postcard that my friend ben sent to me from philadelphia as a bookmark in THE SHACK. there are beetles on the postcard. i like insects.
Baker, if you ever published in Relevant mag, you know I would buy like 50 copies, right? I would even give one to my Mama.
Kevin, there is a mirroring of Papa (whom you meet later) in Nan's character that I think is so true of those awesome God -lovers that we know (your wife included) that represent God in such a true light that you can't help but smile when you meet them.
True Story: On my fridge there is an autograph from Val Kilmer that I recieved from him when I was a waitress many odd yrs ago. I'm proud of that autograph, but humbled by the fact that I didn't recognize him and yet he left it on the table with a heafty tip anyway. Spiritual analogies anyone?
Um, well, I threw myself in the book w/o reading the foreword b/c I'm too impatient and actually read it after I finished the book and as horrible as it is, it explained a lot to me... I didn't know the book would be the Shack and I just bought it a few days ago to re-read. What a coincidence! This should be interesting...
ashley brock - stellar good val kilmer story. if i could get me a napkin with christian bale's writing on it, i would flip my flapjacks. that man is capital G - Good looking.
Post a Comment