The Cheese Monkeys
I read The Cheese Monkeys, by Chip Kidd, while camping. Chip Kidd is a hotshot book-jacket designer. He's almost certainly designed covers for books you have read. He was even the designer for Cormac McCarthy's border trilogy covers. He also wrote this novel, The Cheese Monkeys, published in 2001.
First, let me say that I found this to be a rollicking good read for a camping trip. I found myself up late in the tent, reading by flash-light on more than one night. There are many things I really enjoyed and appreciated about the novel, yet I think it also fails in some ways.
Stuff I liked
The novel is set at art school, and revolves around a set of relationships between a small group of students, and an eccentric and brilliant graphic design teacher who is very uncomfortable with the confines of his life and work. Well, I went to art school, and I found it easy to relate - I had some eccentric and brilliant teachers too. I like how the protaganist - Hap - is detatched at first, and cynical, but is drawn in to the graphic design world through the strange and extreme methods of his teacher. The second major protagonist, Himillsy seemed familar to me too - very bright, very opinionated, lost and confused. Her condemnation of Picasso's Desmoiselles d'Avignon was hilarious and charming (though misguided- I was amused that this character was blind to one of Picasso's greatest strengths, his draftsmanship). I was drawn into the growing relationship between Hap and Hims, and enjoyed their adventures along the way.
The teacher - Winter Sorbeck - is positioned as a brilliant designer, who for reasons we don't know, somehow ended up teaching at State - we learn early on that he is brilliant, but we also understand early on that State ain't Yale. His teaching methods are extreme to the point of being abusive. He took graphic design so seriously, that his class was conducted like a war, and he wasn't taking prisoners. I learned a few things about graphic design, and I really appreciated the uncompromising approach. If there was anything I took away from my experience in art school was to be uncompromising about my painting always, so I was hip to this, and thought along the way that I would have enjoyed this class. The character of Sorbeck reminded me of John Metcalf's cranky but brilliant novel, General Ludd, about a poet in residence in a major Canadian University in the 70s. Both protaganists have difficulty fitting into the teaching establishment, yet both need that very establishment for their bread on the table - a sad problem. I recall being in high school, in it must have been 1978, and going up to York University to check out the painting facilities. The whole University business was pretty scary to me at the time. I wandered through the hallways, and spied on a one-to-one crit. The artist/professor, who was not cut out to be a teacher, and wan't one for much longer, looked at the student and growled, "one a scale of one-to-five, this painting is a minus three!" I was terrified, and I scurried away with my tail between my legs. So this was what University was like.
Stuff that confused me
At a certain point I started to become confused. Hap and Himillsy never jumped into the sack. Hims has some kind relationship going with an architecture student that is basically not explored. We find out that even though Hap lets on that he wants an intimate relationship with Hims, he is in fact discovering his homosexuality, manifested in his attraction to his professor. I didn't believe any of this business. I didn't believe this guy didn't know he liked boys before this. any more than I believed in the relationship between Hims and her supposed architect-sweetheart. Sorbeck, durnk, claimed to have slept with Himillsy, and I wasn't convinced of this whole business at all. I thought it was dishonest of the author to set up the relationships one way, then suddenly, swiftly, change direction and redefine them at the end of the book. Finally, I was confused about how the whole business ended, and why. I think the author lost control of the novel. I suspect his motivation was primarily to use fiction to teach us about graphic design - and to that extent, he was successful. It seemed a little like he was grasping at straws to find ways to bring this novel - a novel that just raced along - screeching to a conclusion.
My comments may sound a little harsh - escpecially, since, as I said at the beginning of this review, I very much enjoyed the book. Should you read this novel? Yes, I think it is well worth the read. You may, like me, be ultimately disappointed, but still, there is a lot on the table. The novel is also very entertaining and in some places hilarious.
On the 5 anchovy scale, I give this one 3 salties.
2 comments:
Great review. Um, you didn't metion the design of the book, which I thought was lovely. Isee what you mean about the end of the novel.
Now, would you say that the authour was trying to treat the characters like as if we were finding out about their sexuality? Or am I cutting too much slack here? I mean, how often do we know someone for years later to find out something persoanl about their sex lives...or orientation. Is this book set in what era? If it was 30 yrs ago, possible characters weren't out like people grow up now....?
I mean, obviously this was an irritating factor. It reminds me of a terrible novel, Self by Yann. I swore I would never read another book by Yann because I found Self so awful, crappy fake poetry style, irritating pretentiouss with narroator changing genders throughout...boring...but then I did land up reading Life of Pi. Good thing I'm not a book agent, heh heh. Um, I didn't like the writing in Pi much either, but loved the animal sequences and the ending was a noble statement on storytelling etc.
At first, I thought the design of the book needlessly goofy - it actually caused me to avoid reading it for some time. It wasn't until I actually read through a chapter or two that I realized this was a book I might want to read (I should just read them immediately once you've sent them my way, since you've introduced me to so many fantastic books!). As I read the book, I came to terms with the design and accepted it, because the book centred around learning about graphic design. It was as if the design of the book was a "final project" for Kidd, wrapping up the loose ends in the design.
Ok, the book was set in the late 50s, a pretty repressed time for sure... the problem I had is that the sexuality of the characters was inseparable many other aspects of the book such as plot, characterization, pace, and so on. Kidd didn't seem to know what to do with Hims, any more than the character knew what to do with herself. But, how can you spend so much of a book developing a relationship that becomes meaningless by the end of the novel? The failure of the author to cope with the complexities of his characters' sexuality - in a repressed time - throughout the novel, set the novel up for failure.
If Kidd didn't want to get into the sexuality of the characters, he would have avoided the entire critical page where Hap shoves his tongue into the mouth of his unconscious teacher. It also pissed me off that at the end only, he revealed that Hims understood Hap's sexuality all along. She says something about him loving Sorback "that way", and she could tell by the way he looked at him.... Well, hells bells Candy, Kidd didn't let that on to us at the same time - not fair (or did I miss some obvious stuff along the way?....)
I think the best aspect of the book for me, is that it took me back to my own school experiences. I was able to re-experience the joy of learning in that delightful and naiive university student way. That was expertly done!
Post a Comment