World's End (Contemporary American Fiction)

Here's what you get with this one. You get a narrative about an aimless twenty-year old of Dutch descent in late sixties, upstate New York. He's conflicted and anxious for reasons he can't understand, not to mention that he sees ghosts. He loses his foot in a motorcycle accident at the site of an historic Indian marker. You also get a narrative about his mother and father in the late forties who take part in what is seen by the locals as a communist rally, and that has tragic results for both of them. Lastly, you get a narrative about his forefathers in 17th century New York, the most important plot-wise of whom loses HIS foot in an accident.

Intermingled in these narratives are the stories of those who interacted with our twenty-year old and his family--primarily a wealthy Dutch family and the local Indian tribe--and all those in the present story are descendants of those in the past. In general, the wealthy family is cruel, the regular family is cowardly and the Indians are oppressed. Oh. And there are a number of striking--if not improbable--coincidences between past and present of a kind similar to the amputated foot thing.

This really isn't as confusing as it sounds, although it helps that there is a two page list of principal characters at the beginning. You may find that you don't have to refer to it after every page, but refer to it, you will.

They're all pretty good stories, though, and despite the obvious forays into magical realism Boyle mostly keeps it real. The characters are distinctive and he is very good at maintaining narrative tension. It is one of those books in which you find you regret that a chapter has come to an end, only to become completely immersed within a few pages of the next.

But as engrossing as all of these stories are individually, they really don't mesh as a whole, and that, in a nutshell, is the problem with his novel. The twenty year old learns that his father, who abandoned him, acted despicably. When he finally confronts him, late in the novel, he is told that it has to do with what happened in 1690. In 1690 their ancestor acted despicably also, but why? In the face of adversity, this heretofore rather fierce character, without reason or warning, suddenly gives up.

Early in the novel, our twenty-year old is told a legend of the land on which they all now live. Before the white man ever came, an Indian tribe--fictionally named--was dominated by the Mohawks. To appease a fierce Mohawk who'd appeared among them, they presented him with the chief's beautiful daughter. Later, and to their horror, they found that the Mohawk had killed this girl and was in the middle of making a meal of her.

So maybe that's the point. The land was cursed from the very beginning. Or maybe it was the kid's family that was cursed, for acting like cowards. Or maybe it is the white man in general that is cursed, for treating the Indians abominably. Something is cursed, in any event, and it's really not clear that the kid's confrontation with his father at the end resolves it in any way.

Maybe it's just the book. It was published pretty early in Boyle's career and it's possible that as a young writer he simply bit off more than he could chew. One of his later works, Drop City, is more focused, and a richer experience as a result. World's End is a good effort, but Boyle is a far better writer now.

I read this book a while back. I continually refer to it as my favorite TCB novel,and I think I am going to re-read it to make sure it really is better than "Drop City," "Riven Rock" and "When the Killing's Done." It has stayed with me so strongly, years after reading it.

I think Boyle is as iconic and American writer as I can think of. His writing is completely centered on the USA, and whatever region or time period he is describing, he immerses the reader, he makes the place and/or time come alive and that's why he is my #1 favorite writer.

No book is as American as this one, it's practically a history book. That can, indeed be challenging. It also shows Boyle's typical view: Everyone is messed up, and some people at least try to do better, but we all fail. That is how he writes about individuals, and that is how he writes about America. Some people probably have a problem with that. But I love it.

My best friend is a lazy reader. I mean, he doesn't seek out books, he picks from the many books I read and refer to him. He never picks up books unless I recommend them, and he loved "Budding Prospects" but didn't like "World's End." I think because the structure of "World's End" is rather daunting. It is mentioned that there is a three-page list of characters, from three different time periods. That about sizes it up, I had to refer to this list over and over again while reading. I enjoyed the challenge of keeping up with all of these people and how they fit together. My friend did not. I imagine many a reader would be put off by the structure of World's End.

And that's fine. Boyle has written lots of straightforward books, (such as "East is East which is also excellent) and this is certainly the most convoluted. I also think that Boyle was, as another reviewer mentioned, rather more harsh than he is now. Nowadays, a character or two might actually get a somewhat happy ending. That doesn't happen in these older books.

But I don't feel it is dated. Again, I read this in the mid-2000s but it certainly didn't feel dated to me. I give five stars but I also caution that this is not his most accessible work,so it isn't for everyone. I also like movies that don't seem to make that much sense for a long time, and then everything starts coming together. That is how I feel about this book.

This book is like crab. Crab? Yes, crab. Each taste is delicious (that is, deliciously well written). However, like getting at the tantalizing crabmeat, getting through the book is a fight. I don't like fighting my food and I did not enjoy fighting this book. Except for the struggle by Walter to find and understand his father Truman, I was constantly confused regarding the characters and their relationships. It was ultimately worth it, but only marginally. I think I should have started with another T.C. Boyle instead of this one, as other reviewers have suggested.

This book is an extreme rarity in that I don't have a strong feeling for it as a whole, one way or the other. Clearly, Walter's search to understand his father is the best part of the book. Unfortunately, a rather skewed atavism with historical circumstances dumped on the reader in shovelfuls comprises the greater part of this work. It seems to me that if you're going to handle atavism, you need to do it with a great deal of subtlety (Conrad, Faulkner and, especially, John Cowper Powys come to mind.) But if there's one thing not to be found here, it's subtlety. The historian in me sympathizes with Walter at the late-sixties rock concert, where, "In fact, there were few who had any grasp at all that history had preceded them." But the sort of history Boyle offers here is too gimcrack and off-the-cuff to serve as a replacement for lack of knowledge. In fact, if there is a lesson to be learnt about history here it is NOT, "Those not aware of the past are doomed to repeat it." It is rather, and emphatically, "You are doomed to repeat the past whether you are aware of it or not." Boyle and his character Walter seem confused at times as to whether they want to be history professors or hipsters or existential heroes. The end result is none of the above. There is also the quibble of sloppy writing, several instances of which I could cite, but when Boyle has Walter rise to his FEET while in Barrow, it becomes exasperating.

I fail to understand this mediocrity after Water Music, which is a great, erudite, comic novel that I wouldn't hesitate recommending to anyone. But, then, to whom is this book dedicated? "In memory of my own lost father" Seen in this light, the work becomes at least excusable, if not really understandable. I hope Boyle laid his personal demons at least partly to rest regarding his paternity with this book. He's a truly great writer.

World's End is by far my favorite novel. The depth and extent of the characters is overwhelming. Boyle couldn't have done a better job bringing this story to life. Every twist and every turn kept me on the edge of my seat craving more with each page. I may have taken me two read through before everything truly sunk in, but that just shows how deep this novel truly is. I would (and have) recommend this book to anyone.

this book is easy to review: it's brilliant and funny. read it. you won't regret it.

I first came across this book in Germany of all places, while on an extended visit with family. I was amazed to read about my chosen area of residence while visiting my place of birth! I love living in the Hudson Valley with all its history - and T.C. Boyle's book made it come alive in a very enjoyable way. His characters are very well defined and the story is easy to follow (especially if you are familiar with the area!). Now all I have to do is re-read it in English... !

Witless characters do stupid things because . . . the land is CURSED! Oh, please. This convoluted mess is full of mindless people you won't care about, with a plot that never takes off. Ridiculous coincidences stretched over three hundred years turn murky into muck. And while everyone appreciates a clever metaphor, two in every other sentence become distracting. Boyle has done terrific books, but this one is a dud.

That World's End is still in print bears witness to the quality of Boyle's other novels, especially The Tortilla Curtain. That said, there is much quaintness in being plunged back in the 1980s (World's End was published in 1987).

One is shocked how much literary canons have changed in so short a time. Fashion is now for stripped-down writing, dogged focus on plot, close identification with the protagonist, all of it leavened with quantities of technical information (to show the writer has done `research'). Back then was the era of John Irving, of Latin American magical realism, of Robertson Davies and his sagas. What was in vogue was writing about roots, parallel modern and historical plotlines. And this is what we have in World's End. The Van Brunts battle it with the Van Warts, in alternating chapters, in the same New England rural community, in the seventeenth and twentieth centuries. The plots are convoluted, but involve the same struggle for land among more-or-less the same families, plus the marginalized Indians. Indeed, there is a Back to the Future (to stay with the 1980s) flavour to World's End, a comical side to its double characterisation and storyline. And magic, of course, is also involved. The little narrative detours, the useless ornamentation, the baroque detail that are so passé refresh as well as irritate, they are to be savoured when they are not skipped over. World's End is too long, but it is readable if not a classic.

Finally, there is a socialist streak in Boyle. The Van Brunts bear the brunt, while the rich Van Warts have all the warts; it's that simple. The poor are oppressed but kind at heart, the rich are selfish, narrow-minded, and obsessive. Sometimes they reject their background and, by joining the oppressed, become goodies. More often they find stooges and traitors among the poor, whose only exit is in revolution. It doesn't bother me, but it does constrain the range of outcomes to the storyline.

After being dazzled by some of his short stories in the New Yorker and elsewhere, and seeing that this novel won the not-insignificant Pen/Faulkner Award, I had pretty high hopes. After finishing it, I was impressed by his vocabulary, appreciated the connection and recurrence of themes through the multi-generational plot, and heard the ring of truth in the characters as flawed as life . . . and yet somehow, after all that, I was left with the feeling that there will be many other books that I will reread before this one.

So who am I to three-star a book that won an award also given to Walker Percy, Philip Roth, Tobias Wolff, Jamaica Kincaid, Marilynne Robinson, and many other leading lights of the American literary scene? Perhaps what it comes down to is that I think the central question of this book--fate vs. free will, as expressed through one's family history--has been explored more compellingly and to my liking elsewhere (East of Eden, for example). While it may accurately reflect human nature to have many of the characters largely trapped by their heritage, I guess what this book made me realize is that I want my literature to offer me more hope than life does.