Theroux, Oi, Such a Writer!

I’ll begin like this: I was unfulfilled by this book and there are not many things I can say a Peace Corps Memoir (or any book, for that matter) should emulate.

To start, he gives a poor reason for taking the trip. He says, “I wanted the pleasure of being in Africa again.” (1) But should a PC memoir do this? The reason should be there, but I think it should be better than Theroux’s. And if it isn’t – I knew a few PCVs who just wanted a break from the “real world” – make me believe it. I didn’t believe Theroux, ever, which was part of the problem.

Throughout, Theroux likes to talk about his writing. This is the only thing I think a PC memoir should copy. He starts, on the first page, “Such a paragraph needs some explanation – at least a book; this book perhaps.” The meta-lit is an old technique. I’ve seen it in old traveler’s tales. I actually like it. It’s engaging at times. I’ve noted that meta-lit should be part of PC memoir because it’s part of the story. It’s a large part, one that is too large to ignore, so large that if left out it leaves a gaping hole.

I made a note around page 285: “Harasses aid workers again – this and the topic that Africa can take care of itself is repeated over and over as if it is new.” Sometimes repeating something is a good thing, but it seemed to me Theroux made one draft of this book and didn’t reread it. It feels like Theroux is forcing a theme –the stupidity of aid-workers or the belief in self-reliance – here and there (over and over), but the real theme is that there is no theme. He’s just taking a trip. And unlike other respected works of literature, this book lacks an overall, obvious theme. And a theme is needed to grab and ground the reader, to impress and inspire the reader.

I made a note about honest writing while reading the fourteenth chapter: “This is the chapter where he feels the most, puts forth the most emotion - perhaps why I was annoyed with the read at other times: he's just a passerby, little attachment, just an observer – but can a travel writer do otherwise? Thubron didn't get emotional much either, but his book was good. Perhaps it was his genuine interest in the people, the culture, the history - he felt a need to understand and the reader could tell. Theroux did have a sort of bond with the continent, too, though he showed it by being, well, a wiener.”

By “wiener” I mean he was mean to people. Whereas Thubron truly took interest in the people he wrote about, a feature which drew me in to the text, Theroux instead jokes and berates them. Perhaps it’s just me, but that turned me right off. Confrontations, belittling, these things are unfavorable in reading as well as in real life – I don’t want to be around it.

I made this note in chapter 19: “ ‘How nice it would be, I thought, if someone reading the narrative of my African trip felt...it was the next best thing to being there.’ (406) I find myself tired of this journey, anxious for its end - I know he wants the reader to feel "as if they were there," but I don't think this reader-fatigue was what he had in mind.”

It’s something to strive for, though, right? I’m not so sure, if he means engaging the senses. I’m thinking of great books: Hemingway’s For Whom the Bell Tolls and Dillard’s Pilgrim at Tinker Creek. I didn’t feel I was in Spain or at Tinker Creek, but I was swept up in the story of the one and the musings of the other. The next best thing is reading a great story. Which might even be a better thing.

(Theroux would hate to read that I compared his work to Hemingway's - he makes a point to berate Hemingway's depiction of "safari Africa.")

I made a note, as I read this first chapter, “This seems to be quite the ambitious travel book – 500 pages – can he keep my interest for so long?” But I did not enjoy myself at the end. I just wanted to finish. Perhaps that’s why I enjoyed chapter 21 so little: “Unlike Thubron, who does not describe every detail of his journey, Theroux does, though in general terms: ‘Maputo appeared as a succession of outlying shanty towns and soon we were traveling from one district to another, with not much improvement in the look of things.’ (440-1) - perhaps that's why it's 500 pgs. . . flirts and debates with a pretty missionary on an antique Mozambican train for 7 pages - too long.”

I felt he was taunting me by writing about this girl for so long. I could not believe he kept going. These two notes I will remember: detailing everything gets tiresome and chatting with one person so very uninteresting for too long at the end of the book is bad.

So: giving unbelievable reasons for going, pushing unbelievable themes, repressing your true feelings, being unapologetically mean, trying too hard to make the reader “feel they were there,” and cramming in too many details, thus dragging the reader along too many pages – all bad things.

Good thing: talk about your writing.

Because my comments have been mostly negative, I want to add something. I know Theroux is a respected and award-winning writer who deserves our respect. I want to be clear that I respect him for these things. My above comments are not meant to belittle Theroux the man, or author. They are merely a graduate student's observations.