Reviewing Liars' Club

7/13/2014

Technically, this is a space for a blog, but we are going to use it more as a discussion board. For a first post, I'm asking you all to consider the reading listed for Monday's class on our syllabus (from Lopate and Kephart) and post about a hand's width review of Liars' Club that considers what Lopate and Kephart have to say about this memoir as well as your final thoughts on the book (now that we've talked about, and it's settled into us a little bit).

Once you've posted, be on the look out for other posts from classmates. Respond at least once. You can respond to one person, several, or the entire class. Up to you. Your response does not have to be a whole hands width--perhaps at least a half a hand.

Thanks again for giving me the night off.

13 Comments

John

7/13/2014 10:36:27 am

My final opinion about _The Liars' Club_ is that Karr outsmarted herself by trying to outsmart her readers. She was playing with us from the very beginning by starting in media res and then giving us that extended, dramatic build-up to understand her opening scene. She did it again with the abruptness of the babysitter rape scene in Chapter 12. She did it at the end, as well, when she ended so strangely with the reverie about death and bliss. Initially, I respected Karr's style of playing with us, but now that I've sat with it (and read some of _Autobiography of a Face_), I just don't think it worked. Why the need to be so smart with us? Why the need to hide her reflections? Why couldn't she be more direct and give us at least a little more about the purpose of her book?

Kephart gives a nice summary of what a memoirist like Karr should be doing. Specifically, in the "Empty Your Pockets" chapter, Kephart writes, "... as memoirists our job is to understand not just what we are holding in place but also why" (108). Karr does a phenomenal job of showing us what she holds onto, but the why is unclear. Lapote, in "On the Necessity of Turning Oneself into a Character," explains it another way when he writes about how a memoirist should write about him- or herself: "... you need to cut away the inessentials and highlight just those features in your personality that most quickly characterize you, preferably those that lead to the most intense contradictions and ambivalence" (19). Karr does this--she does give us specific pieces of herself and her story--but after reading, considering, and discussing _The Liars' Club_, I still don't know why she gave us what she did.

Jenn

7/13/2014 11:35:24 pm

I noticed that you mentioned when you started reading "Autobiography of a Face," your views on Karr changed a bit. That same thing happened to me. I didn't mind "Liar's Club" as much as I do now. It seems like reading the fresh insights and beautifully written thoughts of Grealy, I really feel like there was a lot missing to Karr's memoir. I understand wanting the reader to do some of the work figuring out why things are written the way they are; I just think, especially with a memoir, the reader shouldn't be expected to do all of the work.

Debbie

7/14/2014 07:15:48 am

Hi John,

I find it interesting that you, Tara, and I seem to share the same idea about Karr holding back on her reflections. I agree that she does tell a wonderful story but it is not clear why. I also questioned the ending - one of my sticky notes asked the question "Does she want to die?" after reading that last page. Again, we just don't know...we end her book knowing much but understanding little.

My opinion of Karr was also further influenced by reading Grealy :)

Jenn

7/14/2014 12:38:16 am

Despite my feelings about "The Liar's Club," one thing I think Karr did well was make herself a character. I imagine that it could have been tempting to focus on the disgusting alcoholism of her parents and the bossy know-it-allness of her sister and avoid really developing the "I," as Lapote says. Whenever Karr used "I," I really had a sense of who she was as a child. This came out strongest to me when she described her prayers. Karr was not afraid to tell the truth completely about her most intimate, inner thoughts. She would tell the reader about deals she never intended to keep or times when she would pray her sister dead. This for me really turned her into a real person and added to the overall trustworthiness of the rest of her writing.

That being said, I’m not sure that Karr “engendered compassion,” as Kephart writes. Even though she was a young child going through some very difficult times with her parents, I didn’t feel for her the way I could have. This could have been the result of her blunt writing and lack of reflection about these events of her childhood.

John

7/14/2014 02:07:57 am

Hi, Jenn!

It's interesting that you found Karr to be trustworthy, as a result of her openness. For me, it went the other way; I feel like she was almost too open, too conscious of being a narrator. She spent so much time describing and so little time reflecting that I felt a little distrustful.

That contributes, for me, to your second point about it being difficult to feel a lot of compassion for Karr. More reflection would have humanized her a bit more, I thought, and would have made her not just a great writer but a great memoirist as well.

Tara Iacobucci

7/14/2014 05:32:44 am

Hi Debbie. I think that Karr could have spent more time on developing her own character. As Debbie said, I think she is "missing an essential" part of her memoir by leaving the understanding up to the reader. I am half way through Grealy's book and find that she does such a wonderful job of sharing her reflections with the reader. This might seem too telling to some but I appreciate it. It helps me connect to her and her experiences (which I had trouble doing when I read The Liar's Club.)

Debbie

7/14/2014 06:54:33 am

Hi Jenn,

I agree with your assessment that Karr has characterized herself well. She really did leave it all on the page - though I am not sure I agree that she was completely trustworthy as a narrator for reasons I outlined :)

It was interesting to me that you talked about the lack of compassion you felt for her and tied that directly to her lack of reflection. That is not a direct connection I had made but I think you may be on to something!

Tara Iacobucci

7/14/2014 05:28:39 am

By Tara Iacobucci

I agree with the majority so far--that this memoir did not, for me, meet the expectations of a memoir and I more readily understood why I disliked it after reading Lapote (and Grealy). I felt that Karr did not offer enough reflection on her past which, as a reader, is something I wanted. Lapote's article argues that the memoirist, as a narrator, needs to develop his or her character. I felt that Karr's portrayal of the other characters in the novel--her mother and father specifically--were powerful and real. Yet, Karr herself, throughout most of the book, seemed underdeveloped. Lapote says, "There is something off-putting about a nonfiction story in which the I is infinitely more sinned against than sinning. By showing our complicity in the world's stock of sorrow, we convince the reader of our reality and even gain his sympathy." This is exactly what I found lacking--I did not really have sympathy for Karr but felt, instead, too distant from her and her experiences.

After reading Kephart's chapter called "I Hear Voices", I also wondered about the credibility of Karr's father's stories that were told in dialogue. When I read the book, these sections bothered me and I think that Kephart explains why this might be: "Nothing makes a reader question memoir more indignantly than the things set aside by quotation marks. You remember that whole entire feminist monologue that your mother delivered when she found you smeared with her lipstick...?" I get that Karr took liberties here with the men in the liar's club but thought it strange that this was the only place in the memoir that actually included dialogue. That she would remember the stories in entirety is hard enough to believe--that she could remember the exact words and details might be going beyond the truth.

Kendra Donovan

7/14/2014 11:39:07 am

Tara,

I think it is so interesting that you found Mary's character to be underdeveloped. I both agree and disagree with you on this. I definitely think Karr could have done a better job in developing her character's reflections. I feel like this would have helped us to get to know the adult Karr better, and therefore have a bit more insight into the child version of herself. Without the reflection, I find it difficult to see growth in character, which is where I struggled to like her story. On the other hand, I felt that Karr did a fantastic job in conveying her fear as a child. Whether it was fear over rape, or fear over her grandmother's limb, I found her writing made these emotions tangible. This helped me to understand a bit more about her character. There were also many observations (some I'm sure adult Karr made--especially after reading Kephart's piece) that I felt hit home about whatever situation she was writing about. For instance, I found her struggles over who to stay with after the opening scene, the awareness she felt about gender differences after her first molestation, and her fascination with lying to subtly develop her voice and character. As you said, however, Karr definitely lacks in developing herself in comparison to the other characters who she develops quite nicely.

Debbie

7/14/2014 07:08:08 am

After digesting Karr for a couple of days and reading some of Kephart's and Lopate's views on memoir, I think that regarding characterization of self, Lopate would say that Karr had done a strong job of entertaining or stimulating the reader. On a surface level, Karr certainly goes along with Lopate's idea that you should not be too likable or nice. Her book is riddled with conflicts and action which she recounts with candor, all of which also align with Lopate's ideas about characterization of yourself by being open to exposure. Karr certainly leaves it all on the page and is a strong character in her own story.

On the other hand is Kephart's discussion about truth which was very intriguing in relation to Karr's work, especially regarding dialogue. It is interesting that Karr uses so much dialogue, entire Liar's Club conversations from when she was very young in particular, poured out on the page. As a reader I often wondered how she could remember so much and I found myself questioning the veracity of some of the details. While Karr did a fair job of letting the reader know when she was fuzzy on a certain topic I am not convinced Kephart would agree with her use of so much dialogue which was not always precise, in my opinion, or only used when it would have the greatest impact.

One thing I found to be a bit lacking in Karr's piece was reflection. The quote from Kephart's letter, "The business of a memoir is to expose the human condition in such a way that our description resonates in the souls of other humans" would support this. It feels like she often leaves it up the reader to take something away from her story, but in my opinion that's missing an essential element of memoir. Overall, and especially after reading Grealy, I thought Karr told a good story, but was deficient in that area.

Jessica Donovan

7/14/2014 11:12:20 am

Debbie, it is interesting to me that you and I feel similarly about the dialogue and lack of reflection in Karr's memoir. I agree that Karr is a strong (and I would venture to say likeable) character in her story, however, the use of dialogue also confused me as I was reading. It seems somewhat unlikely that a young child could remember all that she seemed to in such vivid detail. I do believe that some of the dialogue she used did have a great impact, but perhaps not all of the time. The reflection piece was a big part for me as well. I believe that good memoir should be cathartic for the writer, but I do not see how it could be when Karr spends very little time discussing what this means for her now. How she lives her life, what she believes, etc.

I remember us talking about the little reflection she includes on the last couple pages and how confused we were by it. I, too, felt she was expressing that perhaps she was ready to or wanted to die. Now that we have had some class discussion on it, I feel like I understand a little better, but I still think Karr could have improved in that area.

:)

Jessica Donovan

7/14/2014 11:03:23 am

As Lopate expresses, it is arrogant to think of yourself as radically different from your parents. Parents set the outline for your personality, way of thought, etc., and I feel that this holds true with Mary Karr and the relationship with her mother and father. Mary’s mother had these secrets that she continued to hold on to throughout a large part of her life, as did Mary. Both eventually let their secrets be revealed, but concealed them inside for various reasons for quite a while. Frequently throughout the novel, Mary identifies with her father, a member of the Liars’ Club. Mary did not try to write about how her parents were one way and she was completely different, as that would most likely be untrue (for many of us at least). Our parents shape us in one way or another and I hold this to be virtually universal.

Following Lopate’s views on building a character, I believe that Karr succeeded in building herself a character in The Liars’ Club. Mary established characteristic actions and behaviors that we came accustomed to, and this helped us get to know her. Lopate urges writers to not hold back, that there is no need to make memoir pretty, so to speak. We need conflict in memoir or readers will most likely become bored with the writer. Mary doesn’t try to sugarcoat the truth or make things seem pleasant when they weren’t. At the same time, I respect her in that she does not simply write about the traumas of her childhood in a voice that is angry or judgmental. I appreciate that ability of Karr’s to get that distance from her self, from her experiences, to be able to write about such things honestly and openly.

Lopate writes that self-amusement will keep the reader interested in what you are writing about. Karr delivers this time and time again. I can tell from reading her book that she really likes herself. This is pleasant to see, because I feel that many people tend to focus on all the things they hate about themselves, all the ways they feel inferior. I enjoyed reading about Mary and Lecia’s spunk and boldness. It developed their characters well and really helped me understand more about Mary’s family.

One of the issues I did have with the memoir coincides with that of my classmates. I believe that reflection should be a large part of memoir because this would serve to help us grow as individuals. There was very little reflection in The Liars’ Club, and most of it was thrown in at the end (in my opinion). However, I can still respect the characters that Mary developed and her stylistic choices as a writer. I feel that I am a very forgiving reader, and as long as I sense a good vibe from the book, I can appreciate as well as enjoy it. Kephart writes, on page 80, “The point is for you to know who you are” and I do feel that towards the end of the memoir, Mary is developing her sense of self, truly discovering who she is and dealing with all that has happened. While I do believe this, I also highly agree with a comment Kephart makes on page 108 when she says “…as memoirists our job is to understand not just what we are holding in place but also why” and I do feel that this memoir required more “why”.

I am still not quite sure how I feel about the frequency of the dialogue in this text. I am one that does enjoy reading conversation between characters as it provides me with insight into their relationships with one another; however, I also understand how it would bother some readers because much of the dialogue is from many years prior to Karr writing the memoir. We wonder how it is possible that she remembers all these interactions word for word. I keep with Kephart’s ideas that dialogue needs to keep proximity to the truth, but I also feel that sometimes it has great impact on the text.

Kendra Donovan

7/14/2014 11:23:54 am

After reading Lopate's "On the Necessity of Turning Oneself into a Character", and considering Mary Karr's The Liars' Club, I have reached the personal conclusion that Mary Karr was being far too ambitious to be truly successful in her memoir. First and foremost, one of the most important aspects of memoir is conflict. As Lopate noted, conflict is what gives our writing power. Yet, it is also incredibly important that the conflict an essayist or memoirist pursues not be too ambitious or too slight. In terms of Karr's memoir, I think she was a bit too ambitious. While reading, I often struggled to find the point. It was not until the last page, where I began thinking of the book in terms of truth, lies, and memory that the writing came together for me. Though I'd like to believe otherwise, at times I wasn't sure whether or not Karr knew the true purpose of her memoir. It seemed that writing was cathartic for her, but the reflection and how she learned from her experience was lacking. Karr's inability to reflect on her work showed to me that she took on a project far too large. The memoir seemed to have served it's purpose for her (allowing her to express herself/come to some kind of formal conclusions), but perhaps should have been mulled over and added to prior to being published.

Though Karr's lack of reflection ruined the memoir for me, as I am sure it did for other's, I do have to say I appreciated some of the other aspects of her writing that I thought she did quite well. I felt Karr excelled at honing in on the quirks of her characters. Particularly in her scenes with the storytelling at The Liars' Club, I felt her characters truly came alive. Her father, arguably the most human and sympathetic character in the memoir, was developed and perfected during these scenes, as were the men he befriended. These men were average, or as Lopate would say "common as dirt", but their characters and stories were nearly glorified in these meetings. You could sense Karr's admiration and interest in these men and it made me intrigued as well. Furthermore, I felt that Karr's observations of human emotions and actions (even the most basic, such as the way they neighbor women stood around in the beginning scene) proved her ability to note the mundane and turn it into something to pique curiosity. These subtle scenes are ones the reader can usually identify with, but may not make note of on his or her own and I appreciated that. Despite these traits, I still felt that Karr did not write a memoir in the true sense.

With that being said, I am also struggling to like Grealy's piece. After having read a majority of the book, and having taken a closer look at Lopate's piece, I feel that Grealy looks with too much pity on her own situation. She doesn't like herself, and therefore it makes it hard for me to like her or even identify with her. Though I feel her piece is far more reflective than Karr's, and therefore more of a memoir in form, I feel it has distinct shortcomings in areas where Karr's memoir flourished.

Reviewing Liars' Club

Leave a Reply.

ENGL 513

Archives

Categories