A 1200-page Western that defies conventions? Mark Z. Danielewski's 'Tom's Crossing' is an epic tale of horse riding, loyalty, and survival set against the backdrop of 1980s Utah. On the surface, the story of Kalin March, a 16-year-old outsider who strikes up an unlikely friendship with Tom Gatestone, seems straightforward enough – until Danielewski complicates things.
With over half a million words, 'Tom's Crossing' is not just long; it's also dense and deliberately arcane. The novel begins by hinting that the events described are already widely known, and from there, Danielewski plunges us into a world of elaborate art installations, operas, and songs, with an astonishing array of named characters whose thoughts and attitudes we're encouraged to explore in detail.
However, for all its ambition and ingenious plotting, 'Tom's Crossing' can be infuriatingly difficult to get through. The narrative voice is a bizarre blend of Homeric grandeur and rural American drawl, dropping "g"s on participles and using arcane words that add to the novel's sense of self-importance. Every moment in the story is dissected with hyperomniscience, leaving even minor characters and their hobbies excruciatingly detailed.
One can't help but wonder whether Danielewski has been writing this book for academic immortality rather than pure enjoyment. It certainly feels like he's trying to prove a point about literary merit rather than simply telling a story that captivates its readers.
And yet, beneath the complexities and eccentricities of 'Tom's Crossing', lies a surprisingly straightforward western tale with limited nudity, violent scenes, and simple moral choices – more akin to an 80s blockbuster than experimental literature.
With over half a million words, 'Tom's Crossing' is not just long; it's also dense and deliberately arcane. The novel begins by hinting that the events described are already widely known, and from there, Danielewski plunges us into a world of elaborate art installations, operas, and songs, with an astonishing array of named characters whose thoughts and attitudes we're encouraged to explore in detail.
However, for all its ambition and ingenious plotting, 'Tom's Crossing' can be infuriatingly difficult to get through. The narrative voice is a bizarre blend of Homeric grandeur and rural American drawl, dropping "g"s on participles and using arcane words that add to the novel's sense of self-importance. Every moment in the story is dissected with hyperomniscience, leaving even minor characters and their hobbies excruciatingly detailed.
One can't help but wonder whether Danielewski has been writing this book for academic immortality rather than pure enjoyment. It certainly feels like he's trying to prove a point about literary merit rather than simply telling a story that captivates its readers.
And yet, beneath the complexities and eccentricities of 'Tom's Crossing', lies a surprisingly straightforward western tale with limited nudity, violent scenes, and simple moral choices – more akin to an 80s blockbuster than experimental literature.
- has anyone else tried reading it? I mean, the premise sounds cool but like half a million words is just crazy 
... idk if i'd be able to get through that many pages of art installments and operas 
it's over 1000 pages long and Danielewski is all about that dense & arcane life 
he drops so many names & references that u'll be like "wait what just happened?" 
but seriously, the story itself is actually pretty straightforward - it's a western tale at heart! 
i mean don't get me wrong, it's def got its quirks & complexities, but there's something to be said for a good ol' fashioned underdog story 
. And what's with all the extra details? It's like he's saying "Hey, look, Tom's favorite snack is cornmeal mush! Isn't that fascinating?" 
, and I'm like, wait, really? Why all the fuss then? Can't we just enjoy a simple tale of loyalty and survival without having to figure out every single character's thoughts? 
. Maybe it's for me, maybe not...
. It's like, we want a story that's gonna blow our minds, you know? But sometimes that means sacrificing some intimacy with the characters and the plot. For me, the question is, what's more valuable: getting lost in a dense, intricate world or having a straightforward narrative that just resonates with us on a deeper level? 
. I mean, I get what Danielewski's trying to do - break all the rules and push boundaries - but can't he just write something that feels more... natural? 
. I'd rather have a good ol' fashioned western any day, you know?
. It feels like he's got this grand vision of what literary fiction should be, and then he just kind of... loses himself in it 
. But hey, maybe that's the point? Maybe we're supposed to get lost in it too 
. I did enjoy the western part of it tho 
. And I'm not sure why it would be considered "experimental literature" because, honestly, sometimes those books just feel like a challenge to get through 
.
! Danielewski's all about pushing the boundaries, but sometimes you just wanna be told a story, you know? 
The amount of info he dumps on us is crazy – I mean, who needs that many details about art installations and operas?! 