Hell of a Book

Question 1: “This statement is false.” What on earth does that mean? If it’s telling the truth, and it’s false, then it’s true! And if it’s not telling the truth, then it’s not false, it’s true! 

What am I talking about? Self-reference. It’s very confusing. When a statement, or--ahem--a novel refers to itself, our brains break down. The word for novels that do this is metafiction. Hell of a Book is metafiction.

Why is it written this way?

Question 2:  Ha. Question 1 is ridiculously hard. Let’s break it down. What’s the opposite of metafiction? Books where everything just happens normally. Where people behave like actual human beings would. That’s called naturalism. Here’s what the narrator has to say about that:

“Right now, none of the characters know what they want. And because they don’t know what they want, they don’t know why they’re doing anything. They’re just billiard balls banging against one another. And nobody wants to read anything about that--even if that’s just how people go through life sometimes. Naturalism is dead.”

How does this book being self-referential allow the protagonist to exert control over his life? To what extent do we all imagine ourselves as the hero of a story?

Question 3: We’re getting closer. There is something about imagination, about its shaping power, that Hell of a Book believes is vital. That “reflecting reality” isn’t enough. But remember what Kelly says in the end to the protagonist. “Be a person. Be a real fucking person.” 

Fabulation is the practice of telling stories. It also refers to the practice of telling lies. Dissembling. Fantasizing. 

How will the protagonist know when to stop fabulating?

Question 4: Ok, let’s relax. This book is hilarious (in my opinion). Is its humor appropriate? Does it always work? Why is it there?

Question 5: Does Kelly work as a character? Do the women in this novel in general work? Is the protagonist’s sexuality just a way to push people away?

Question 6: Jack, the image consultant, tells the protagonist to keep it light and write a love story. Jack seems to think subject matter is equally important as what the protag. should wear in his interviews (a sport coat). 

Is Hell of a Book’s portrayal of a morally bankrupt publishing industry obsessed with sales numbers convincing? Even if it might be true, do you actually feel like you’re not reading real stories in the books you consume? What’s being left out?

Question 7: The book becomes more naturalistic, perhaps, in its scenes of police violence. They can be extremely difficult to read. When the protagonist departs from reality, as when he doesn’t recognize the cop that shot the Kid, the book can be difficult--or frustrating--in a different way.

What is the purpose of difficulty in Hell of a Book?

Question 8: There are many examples in Hell of a Book of black parents having “The Talk” with their children--this is a real thing that happens in the real world, intended to teach black children survival strategies for encounters with law enforcement.

You may have had The Talk yourself. If you haven’t, how do you imagine it would distort your world view, as either the person giving it or the person hearing it?

Question 9: Does it matter whether the Kid and Soot, or William and the protagonist, are the same person? What does this blurring accomplish?

Question 10: The ending of Hell of a Book in many ways was my least favorite part. It shuts down so much ambiguity to deliver a message--almost like “explaining the joke.” But you obviously may have interpreted it differently. Did you?