One of my favorite things to do is reading books. My main goal in doing that is just for enjoyment. However, once you read enough books, you get a very good sense of certain rules all books follow. These conventions become constant throughout different books, making it easier to focus on the storyline since the overall format is generally the same. However, Mumbo Jumbo disregards these conventions.
It’s not that this book is really old so it has a somewhat different structure and style from that of modern books. It was published in 1972, which means that its format could easily be what we are used to. Reed’s use of numerals always gets me, saying things like “100s” instead of “hundreds” (Reed 20). Also, the pictures that are inserted took a while to get used to, since fictional books usually have illustrations at most, and I would say typically relate to the material in a clear way. I just don’t see that clear relationship in Mumbo Jumbo. These things plus the strange placement of Chapter 1, the strange use of punctuation, and footnotes that seem to not follow any pattern makes Mumbo Jumbo a little bit confusing without even considering the actual text. It’s not that I haven’t encountered books or authors that sometimes don’t follow a certain convention, it’s just that there is an overwhelming number of conventions not being followed here. For example, in Ragtime the dialogue wasn’t in quotation marks or anything, it was just part of the paragraph. I could accept that. Yet Mumbo Jumbo does that same exact thing and it bugs me for some reason.
But the one thing that nags at me the most is, why? Why does Reed format his novel this way? Sure, to a certain extent, I could just say the format was the author’s personal preference. But with this uniquely strange structuring, it’s hard to write it off like that. There’s has to be some underlying meaning to it all. It’s hard to exactly tell what since we have only just started the novel. In class, we compared some of the structure of Mumbo Jumbo to a movie. I think that I can see Reed definitely adding the front matter after Chapter 1 to really remind the reader that the book is fiction. Adding footnotes and pictures also accomplishes that same thing as well. The formatting of dialogue, chapters, pictures, and footnotes also modifies the flow of the novel, which Reed might be doing in terms of a bigger theme in the book or trying to get it to match some aspects of the story. It’s hard to draw definite conclusions at this point in the novel, but I think the structure is important and hopefully by the end we can see maybe why Reed formatted Mumbo Jumbo this way. But maybe I’m just overreacting. What do you think of the formatting?
I certainly agree that Reed's style is unconventional and even a little off-putting. I'm curious to see if it has some underlying meaning as you are suggesting. I assume as readers we will get used to it and hopefully we may even come to understand it.
ReplyDeleteI really really love that the formatting is weird - it just shakes it up and it feels very different to read. It's not like a traditional book at all, and you really have to stop and look things up. It honestly just makes you more conscious of the process or reading and understanding history and art, and I think that's Reed's goal.
ReplyDeleteThis book is weird. I feel like she adds picture to convince you that this book is not a piece of fiction. I mean, Photos don't lie? But on the other hand, everything she does is telling you that this book is fiction.
ReplyDeleteMaybe we can connect this to what Labas (and I think also Reed) say about conforming to Western ideas of art. Papa Labas has a line where he says that Jes Grew, jazz, whatever you want to call it, has its roots in African dance and culture – and as a result is more freeing, more open to experimentation, and not bound by Western expectations of music and art. In contrast, Biff Musclewhite and HVV say that if African artists are to be taken seriously, they have to follow the artistic standards of the Atonist culture.
ReplyDeleteMaybe Reed’s blatant flouting of what we (the Atonists) expect a book to be is enforcing the same point. We say the formatting is wrong. We can even say it’s ugly. But…is it? Or are we just conditioned to be hostile to the changes because we’ve never seen a book structured like that before? After all, according to Reed, the Atonists control the publishers.