Scan barcode
A review by mschlat
We Can Save Us All by Adam Nemett
2.0
It's a pre-(and not post-)apocalyptic novel about some Princeton undergrads, most of whom who have left the school, gathered in a geodesic dome, ingested drugs to give them a sense of the impending doom and their place in it, turned from liberal arts pursuits to more survival-based studies (pharmacology, energy generation, martial arts, ...), and adopted superhero personas and costumes as part of a JLA-type community.
And if any of that gives you pause, if you have any concerns about issues of privilege popping up, if you have any qualms about what might happen when drop-out college students form a communal society, I'd suggest giving this a bye. Note that Nemett's writing is teeming with inventiveness and I would happily try a second fiction work from him, but I was ready for this book to be over about 75 pages before the ending. There's a frustrating (albeit intentional) aura of naivete in our protagonist (David Fuffman, aka "BusinessMan") that extends to the whole book, in that you are simultaneously grappling with serious world-ending issues and sophomoric approaches to life. I never felt that that struggle resolved nicely, and I tired of the naivete.
And now, some additional semi-snarky commentary (with spoilers).......
1) The book is set in the 2020's, and climate change is producing massive floods and storms. But Nemett feels the need to introduce an additional crisis: something is wrong with the very fabric of space and time in that we are losing seconds days by day. Or we think that might be happening. Nemett puts hints about the crisis in the background throughout the first third of the book, but never explains it. Our cult leader, Mathias, was involved in the initial research that "discovered" the problem and states that June 6th is the Null Point when humanity will be... well, somethinged. But by the end of the novel, we find it's all a ruse. How Mathias and others convinced the world this might be a problem is never explained. But this is the driving apocalypse of the book, not climate change, not the deaths of millions climate change brings, not the bombing of Jerusalem that happens in the background, but a faux end-of-the-world that passes and brings us back to some semblance of normality.
2) Because this book is often a paean to normality. At the end, what saves the college students? Their parents. What brings David a sense of closure? His family and his family to be. Yes, the world may be ending, but the novel appears to assert that the world is always ending and we're okay if we just have those close to us. That's a fine sentiment, but not what I expected from a book with pull quotes comparing it to the "dangerous feel of early Don DeLillo" or Pynchon or Neal Stephenson.
And if any of that gives you pause, if you have any concerns about issues of privilege popping up, if you have any qualms about what might happen when drop-out college students form a communal society, I'd suggest giving this a bye. Note that Nemett's writing is teeming with inventiveness and I would happily try a second fiction work from him, but I was ready for this book to be over about 75 pages before the ending. There's a frustrating (albeit intentional) aura of naivete in our protagonist (David Fuffman, aka "BusinessMan") that extends to the whole book, in that you are simultaneously grappling with serious world-ending issues and sophomoric approaches to life. I never felt that that struggle resolved nicely, and I tired of the naivete.
And now, some additional semi-snarky commentary (with spoilers).......
1) The book is set in the 2020's, and climate change is producing massive floods and storms. But Nemett feels the need to introduce an additional crisis: something is wrong with the very fabric of space and time in that we are losing seconds days by day. Or we think that might be happening. Nemett puts hints about the crisis in the background throughout the first third of the book, but never explains it. Our cult leader, Mathias, was involved in the initial research that "discovered" the problem and states that June 6th is the Null Point when humanity will be... well, somethinged. But by the end of the novel, we find it's all a ruse. How Mathias and others convinced the world this might be a problem is never explained. But this is the driving apocalypse of the book, not climate change, not the deaths of millions climate change brings, not the bombing of Jerusalem that happens in the background, but a faux end-of-the-world that passes and brings us back to some semblance of normality.
2) Because this book is often a paean to normality. At the end, what saves the college students? Their parents. What brings David a sense of closure? His family and his family to be. Yes, the world may be ending, but the novel appears to assert that the world is always ending and we're okay if we just have those close to us. That's a fine sentiment, but not what I expected from a book with pull quotes comparing it to the "dangerous feel of early Don DeLillo" or Pynchon or Neal Stephenson.