Loved reading your thoughts on Cusk! I remember picking it up years ago from the library just to give it a go and putting it aside because I didn't feel it was my kind of thing. I still think I probably won't pick it up in the future (so many other things I'd rather be reading instead!), but I look forward to reading more of your thoughts on what she seems to be trying to do with the trilogy or her larger body of work. Even though you didn't enjoy it, it does sound like it has given you lots to think about, which is not always the case with these kinds of books. Years down the line you might end up finding that Cusk has actually become foundational for you in finding out/reaffirming some of your opinions on fiction and the novel in general haha
Also, great reminder that I need to pick up Hild and The Greenlanders, which are patiently waiting to be read on my shelves!
I do always think this... why would I pick up more Cusk when I could be reading something I really like 😅 but as you say it might be quite formative for me in the end, and I'm interested to see how she continues it!
I found your Outline review utterly fascinating to read as someone who read the book last summer and just loved it. The 'nobody talks like this' notes in the margins are hilariously real - I think I said in my review something along the lines of everyone in this book is unnaturally thoughtful, philosophical and ridiculous. I think the comment about the undercurrent of rage is really fascinating and since reading your review is such a heavy theme I feel I initially missed. While I loved it, everything you have said makes me laugh because it is true. I think the novel reveals more about Cusk than Faye, and I think the two are almost one. It is interesting you say your like your novels to have more humanity in them, because I thought outline was unfailing human in its exploration of life - every conversation seemed to be provocatively examining life - how we assign importance, what is success, how do we view others based on how they present themselves to us etc etc. While empty in true characterisation, I thought every character was emotionally complex in the window we were given of them via Faye.
I was interested in reading Cahokia Jazz but maybe not so much anymore! There is, luckily, too much good stuff out there to compromise on to read something full of cultural blindspots!
Books revealing their authors, or revealing more than their authors intended (perhaps not necessarily the case with Cusk) is just something I love thinking about. Especially as its a conversation that isn't really appropriate in, say, academic settings or analysis, but is actually relevant to how books come to be in the real world.
Loved reading this—I had to really think about what I mean when I say humanity! For me I'm definitely always looking for something more grounded, sensory and warm. This book doesn't really have shades of light and dark, contrast, balance. It doesn't really acknowledge the 'soft animal' of the human self (to quote a little Mary Oliver), which is key for me to *love* a book. There are many books I admire that don't do this, but I never feel a deep connection to them.
It is a book that, to me, comes solely from the mind and a certain intellectual vision of the world, rather than from a more embodied experience. Embodiment is actually quite important to me as well just because I don't think you can build a really thorough philosophical or sociological point without acknowledging the role of what it's like to live in a certain kind of body. Another reader may find this in Cusk, though! On a more instinctual basis, I feel like Cusk/Faye doesn't really like people that much haha. I want a bit more sympathy for my characters.
Also re: Cahokia Jazz, I do think it's not very overt on a first pass like he clearly did put in some time and research and effort, but it's definitely not a must-read for me. There's definitely better stuff out there I think!
While I did really enjoy the Outline Trilogy when I read it a few years ago, I found myself agreeing with just about everything you've written above. Curious to hear whether you've read anything else by Cusk? I was surprised by how much more fictional/substantive Second Place felt at times, without losing any of those more abstract themes. And I think Parade, which I've only read half of, leans completely toward the opposite end of that realist/philosophical spectrum– with Outline maybe landing somewhere in the strange in-between?
I actually haven't read any other Cusk so I do feel like my perspective is very limited! I've heard that the approach may be more successful, at least for me, with other books. Definitely intrigued by the differences you point out with Second Place and Parade... whilst I can't say I really enjoy her work, as I said I am kinda fascinated by her. She really speaks to current modes of writing I think in interesting ways.
Outline made me think a lot, too. I've been reading a lot of Cusk's works recently and all of them leave me baffled, but also enamoured. In my case, I found humanity in the stories the other characters were telling Faye, I didn't care about her at all, now that I think about it, lol. For me, I considered the narrator just in terms of the "eyes and ears", the one who observes. I supposed I would get to know more about Faye in the next parts of the trilogy, which I still have to read... I love the way you talk about books and analyze them! Cheers from Argentina!
So interesting!! I've been thinking about why I couldn't feel the same i.e. be interested in the characters and not Faye. I think it's partly the fact that I'm always very interested in how a story is told and from whose perspective it's told because it is the lens of the book, so it's probably partly to do with that approach.
But also I think maybe because Cusk gives the game away with one of the last conversations Faye has. I don't know how well you remember it but I think Faye herself essentially acknowledges outright that she has been seeing *herself* as an outline made up by these other characters' stories. I felt like Cusk's true focus is not on the characters but on Faye, at least in my reading. Everything reflects back on her. But I totally get why you could easily read it the other way and consign Faye to the 'background' as it were.
I understand why you felt frustrated with the “lens”of the book in this case, there doesn’t seem to be much there if you approach it that way. I think for me, not focussing on the perspective of a character felt like a breath of fresh air, sometimes getting into the mind of a character can feel exhausting (this is very personal obvs).
It’s true what you say about the last conversation and how Cusk gives the game away! I think I didn’t pay too much attention to it cause I was very much enthralled with the stories of other characters. Cusk got me 🤣 I’m looking forward to your readings of the next books of the trilogy, if you decide to read them 🤗
Loved reading your thoughts on Cusk! I remember picking it up years ago from the library just to give it a go and putting it aside because I didn't feel it was my kind of thing. I still think I probably won't pick it up in the future (so many other things I'd rather be reading instead!), but I look forward to reading more of your thoughts on what she seems to be trying to do with the trilogy or her larger body of work. Even though you didn't enjoy it, it does sound like it has given you lots to think about, which is not always the case with these kinds of books. Years down the line you might end up finding that Cusk has actually become foundational for you in finding out/reaffirming some of your opinions on fiction and the novel in general haha
Also, great reminder that I need to pick up Hild and The Greenlanders, which are patiently waiting to be read on my shelves!
I do always think this... why would I pick up more Cusk when I could be reading something I really like 😅 but as you say it might be quite formative for me in the end, and I'm interested to see how she continues it!
I found your Outline review utterly fascinating to read as someone who read the book last summer and just loved it. The 'nobody talks like this' notes in the margins are hilariously real - I think I said in my review something along the lines of everyone in this book is unnaturally thoughtful, philosophical and ridiculous. I think the comment about the undercurrent of rage is really fascinating and since reading your review is such a heavy theme I feel I initially missed. While I loved it, everything you have said makes me laugh because it is true. I think the novel reveals more about Cusk than Faye, and I think the two are almost one. It is interesting you say your like your novels to have more humanity in them, because I thought outline was unfailing human in its exploration of life - every conversation seemed to be provocatively examining life - how we assign importance, what is success, how do we view others based on how they present themselves to us etc etc. While empty in true characterisation, I thought every character was emotionally complex in the window we were given of them via Faye.
I was interested in reading Cahokia Jazz but maybe not so much anymore! There is, luckily, too much good stuff out there to compromise on to read something full of cultural blindspots!
Books revealing their authors, or revealing more than their authors intended (perhaps not necessarily the case with Cusk) is just something I love thinking about. Especially as its a conversation that isn't really appropriate in, say, academic settings or analysis, but is actually relevant to how books come to be in the real world.
Loved reading this—I had to really think about what I mean when I say humanity! For me I'm definitely always looking for something more grounded, sensory and warm. This book doesn't really have shades of light and dark, contrast, balance. It doesn't really acknowledge the 'soft animal' of the human self (to quote a little Mary Oliver), which is key for me to *love* a book. There are many books I admire that don't do this, but I never feel a deep connection to them.
It is a book that, to me, comes solely from the mind and a certain intellectual vision of the world, rather than from a more embodied experience. Embodiment is actually quite important to me as well just because I don't think you can build a really thorough philosophical or sociological point without acknowledging the role of what it's like to live in a certain kind of body. Another reader may find this in Cusk, though! On a more instinctual basis, I feel like Cusk/Faye doesn't really like people that much haha. I want a bit more sympathy for my characters.
Also re: Cahokia Jazz, I do think it's not very overt on a first pass like he clearly did put in some time and research and effort, but it's definitely not a must-read for me. There's definitely better stuff out there I think!
While I did really enjoy the Outline Trilogy when I read it a few years ago, I found myself agreeing with just about everything you've written above. Curious to hear whether you've read anything else by Cusk? I was surprised by how much more fictional/substantive Second Place felt at times, without losing any of those more abstract themes. And I think Parade, which I've only read half of, leans completely toward the opposite end of that realist/philosophical spectrum– with Outline maybe landing somewhere in the strange in-between?
I actually haven't read any other Cusk so I do feel like my perspective is very limited! I've heard that the approach may be more successful, at least for me, with other books. Definitely intrigued by the differences you point out with Second Place and Parade... whilst I can't say I really enjoy her work, as I said I am kinda fascinated by her. She really speaks to current modes of writing I think in interesting ways.
Outline made me think a lot, too. I've been reading a lot of Cusk's works recently and all of them leave me baffled, but also enamoured. In my case, I found humanity in the stories the other characters were telling Faye, I didn't care about her at all, now that I think about it, lol. For me, I considered the narrator just in terms of the "eyes and ears", the one who observes. I supposed I would get to know more about Faye in the next parts of the trilogy, which I still have to read... I love the way you talk about books and analyze them! Cheers from Argentina!
So interesting!! I've been thinking about why I couldn't feel the same i.e. be interested in the characters and not Faye. I think it's partly the fact that I'm always very interested in how a story is told and from whose perspective it's told because it is the lens of the book, so it's probably partly to do with that approach.
But also I think maybe because Cusk gives the game away with one of the last conversations Faye has. I don't know how well you remember it but I think Faye herself essentially acknowledges outright that she has been seeing *herself* as an outline made up by these other characters' stories. I felt like Cusk's true focus is not on the characters but on Faye, at least in my reading. Everything reflects back on her. But I totally get why you could easily read it the other way and consign Faye to the 'background' as it were.
I understand why you felt frustrated with the “lens”of the book in this case, there doesn’t seem to be much there if you approach it that way. I think for me, not focussing on the perspective of a character felt like a breath of fresh air, sometimes getting into the mind of a character can feel exhausting (this is very personal obvs).
It’s true what you say about the last conversation and how Cusk gives the game away! I think I didn’t pay too much attention to it cause I was very much enthralled with the stories of other characters. Cusk got me 🤣 I’m looking forward to your readings of the next books of the trilogy, if you decide to read them 🤗