The People's Act of Love by James Meek


finished 6/15 .......... contemp. US ............ rating 7.5

This is a page-turning novel of ideas, how they take people over, how they can determine some pretty extreme actions and how these actions affect others. The characters are interesting and definitely different from each other.

The novel is set in the very north of Russia during their Civil War right after WWI. A violent revolutionary escapes from a prison camp and wanders into a community made up of a group of Skotzie's, an extremely religious group which uses castration to purify the members. The wife and child of one of the members has followed him here but because she can't have sex with him, she looks for it in others. The others nearby are a group of Czech soldiers trying to get out of the country but being prevented by the Reds. The revolutionary turns out to be a cannibal.

** In what situations, or under what conditions, is it permissible to commit murder for cannibalism.

** The effectiveness of voluntary castration for spiritual purposes,

** Is lust a form of hunger? If a person is starving for sex/ love what does that permit?

** Who are "the people?" What is "love?" What would constitute "the people's act of love?" In this novel, who is loving whom and how are they demonstrating this, acting on it, getting it? Could war be considered an act of love?

** What, if anything, is the justification for any of the above. Where do God and morality fit into this picture?

Cormac McCarthy said somewhere that really good authors have to deal with death. (I don't remember the quote and can't find it now.) Meek does that in spades. He deals with love in many forms (at least four I can think of off-hand) and death in several forms (the end of physical life, the end of love(s), the end of spiritual life).

I'm not big on talking about these ideas in the abstract. I like the ideas put into complex human contexts where I can grapple with them and discuss motivations and justifications and causes and effects. This is exactly what Meek does. He doesn't just show in graphic detail the horrendous deeds and then end the discussion by saying that the characters are "insane" and therefore incomprehensible (ala Hannibal Lector). In "The People's Act of Love" the evil characters justify their actions in horrific detail. They explain, defend, and rationalize what they do. This doesn't ever make it a "right" or moral act. It makes it worse in a way.

It's a good book, very intense and wonderfully well written. I'm not usually one to mention metaphors and similes or the like (an allegory in a dream scene), but I noticed Meek's and definitely appreciated them - I found them to be original, genuinely appropriate, thought provoking and full of imagery. There are no cliches (unless Dostoevskiean imagery and religiosity can be considered cliche). And no, I'm not saying that Meek is in any way Dostoevky's contemporary equivalent; it's just that the influence is certainly evident.

This book is certainly not a 10, but it's worth reading.

Posted: Sat - June 16, 2007 at 08:39 AM        

©