A
moment’s preamble:
In June of 2014 I began graduate school at Seton Hill seeking an MFA in
Writing Popular Fiction. This term I’m enrolled in a course that focuses on
MONSTERS, and as a part of that course I’ll blog on each book/story/movie
covered.
“(World War Z) is a collection of individual accounts narrated by an agent of the United Nations Postwar Commission, following the devastating global conflict against the zombie plague. Other passages record a decade-long desperate struggle, as experienced by people of various nationalities. The personal accounts also describe the resulting social, political, religious, and environmental changes.” –Wikipedia
Strength
of Character: B-
This was a very tricky novel for me
to rate for character. The book has a global scale and scope that take center
stage away from the individual, although many of the sections do delve into
more personal struggles.
The story of World War Z does not
closely follow any central characters in anything resembling the usual three
act story structure. Nor does it do more than hint at character arcs and change,
and character arcs it does address, like Todd Wainio’s, occur mostly
off-the-page. We are presented with a man who was changed by his experiences,
but we don’t walk in-step with him along the path to those changes.
The characters do, however, provide
the vehicle for the story, and it is through their myriad voices that we hear
the tale of World War Z.
Genre
Strength: A-
Thematic
Poignancy: A
This was a book brimming with
powerful themes. It begins with the frailty of man, the stubbornness, the
greed, the cowardice. We see glimmers of courage, but in the face of hopeless
odds the sense of helplessness dominates. What can be done to fight despair? To
persist in a world gone to hell?
Max Brooks asks those questions, and
then slowly answers them. We see the world come back from the brink. Hope
returns, however fleeting, and humanity adapts. In the end, there was a tone of
quiet, bittersweet triumph.
Entertainment Value: B+
All that stuff that you keep
wondering about on AMC’s “The Walking Dead,” like what the hell is happening everywhere
else? Are there zombies in the ocean? In the snow? What about in the desert? China?
If you can’t stand not knowing potential answers to these types of questions, I
highly recommend this book. The only caveat I make is that Max Brook’s outlook
on humanity starts of as bleak as any, but by the end, is a relative success
story. The world of The Walking Dead has never felt that way to me.
Overall, after I got over some
initial misgivings about the lack of a central character, I found this novel
extremely entertaining. I am a sucker for great character arcs, though, and at times the novel wanted for them.
Random Notes and Final Grade: B+
*For my money, this novel far
outshines the 2013 Film it inspired. Don’t think you know the story of “World
War Z” just because you saw the movie. The book is nearly unrecognizable in
relation, other than by the existence of zombies and one or two scenes that
bear a slight resemblance.
*Military bravado turned into
outright disaster. Troops under supplied, and an enemy underestimated. The
Yonkers section was a delight to read, and may be the one section that stays
with me the longest.
*The “Redeker plan” for leaving
behind large sections of the populace as bait for the zombies is the sort of
cold, horrific thinking that I find so damn compelling in the zombie apocalypse.
His plan isn’t just unethical, that’s way too mild a term. It is horrific. Yet
it saves lives. Millions. The cherry on top of this zombie-brain pie is of
course the shattered psyche of the man who invented it, now unable to reconcile
his reality with his guilt.
*The inclusion of, and attention to,
ocean-walking zombies was something I had never seen done. It was a nice
surprise that paid dividends throughout the book in some of my favorite
sections, from the disaster at the beach, to the Chinese submarine, and even to
the zombie-killing deep sea divers.
I agree with you on the lack of character arch. But I think it had to do with the style in which it was written. It's a very journalism meets folklore style. Which by its nature is "nothing but the facts as they were reported," (Well...ideally journalism should be that way...but that's a debate for another time). It also doesn't help that the only character we see more than once is the interviewer, who we know nothing about. Is it female? Is it male? We have no idea. The interviewer is totally flat. That leaves us with very little room to see any real character arch. The thing that makes this book good also hurt it's Character arch. But clearly it did just fine and got published, so doing so can't be that bad...can it?
ReplyDeleteI think that it speaks to the advice to do something different. I've never read anything like World War Z before. If it were just a single character, however it would have been more like "World War ZZZZZZZZ" I felt that the change in perspective helped keep the story moving and fresh. Without it, the book would have been a flop
ReplyDelete