Problematic for me (a bit more now that I've caught up and see another instance of it) is the use of the word "diddle". Avril is meeting with young pre-teen girls to do "diddle-checks", and in pp. 510-511 the word is used a few times. The first time was harder to take: the stripper's severely disabled-hideous even?--sister scene where Wallace uses "incestuously diddled" for child rape, "[the father] would diddle his way to extremity" for have intercourse and orgasm, and talks about the child's "post-diddle face" (pp. 371-373). It seems to undercut the seriousness of child rape and the earlier scene in particular is almost like (that dreaded word which someone already indicated that when applied to the book as a whole, it pisses them off) a spoof of particularly sick case of severe sexual abuse--in which the grotesque is foregrounded. When you read the description of the scene you end up feeling that the victim is more grotesque, more of a monster, than the perpetrator. I have trouble with this. The stripper, the teller of the story, might have used the term "diddled' to distance herself from the events, and I thought that might be the case at first, however abandoned that idea because the voice sounds so much like the narrator in other parts of the book, not least because he keeps using that term in various ways, and because the Avril keeping-yourself-safe-if-you're-girl-child section also used the term.
If it comes out that the P.G.O.A.T. also had sexual abuse in her history, I think Wallace will take a less spoof-y tone. If that should be the case, I will wonder about why the switch. Nothing must make a child more lonely than having been made aware of, or the victim of sexual abuse. It's interesting that he doesn't quite make the tie-in to lonliness with the stripper's story through the compassionate take one would have in discussing such a history if it happened this way in someone's real life.
What do other people think?
|