I wandered through Cory Doctorow’s funny, provocative Down and Out in the Magic Kingdom while I waited around two airports, a hotel room, and the New York Public Library—a variety of places I was just passing through on my way to somewhere else. The settings were apt, for the short novel itself narrates Jules’s passage through one phase of his long life, on his way elsewhere. In Down and Out, Doctorow teases readers with questions about life, love, identity, technology, and community without belaboring any of the topics in the heavy-handed way that so many writers can’resist.
The book follows a year in Jules’ life in Disney World, as he takes in a friend from his past, helps fend off a predatory collective of amusement engineers, struggles with love, dies several times, and emerges perhaps wiser—though not necessarily.
Doctorow writes with a satisfying deftness, keeping his plot progressing at a an almost cinematic pace (indeed, the novel reads in some ways as a draft for a screenplay, although, regrettably, one can’t imagine the Disney corporation having the insight to permit such a movie to be made, more’s the pity). The periodic flashbacks don’t throw off the plot line’s advance; the hypothetical technology seems real and, largely, quite desirable (someone must encode a process for identifying Whuffie, now—speaking of which, whence comes that tag for online reputation?); the neologisms are generally transparent. Though the characters are drawn to be no rounder than the plot requires, they hold our interest and engage our sympathies in subtle ways. Most important, the ideas at stake drive the plot: What does it mean to have a particular identity? What makes an experience particularly moving or enjoyable? What makes Jules’s life meaningful? Doctorow propels readers through an amusement ride of meaning, leaving them exhilarated, tantalized, and eager for more.
He might well have supplied more without overextending the plot. Jules refers often to his days at the University of Toronto, and Doctorow might have offered a fuller picture of that critical phase of the radical social change that the whole book presupposes. Or he might have written out a longer ending, permitting readers to see how the year in Disney World affected Jules in the longer run. Still, one can’t complain about an author who opts to leave readers hungry for more rather than yawning for less. The streamlined narrative conveys part of the disburdened world Jules inhabits.
Critics are comparing Doctorow to Bruce Sterling, Douglas Adams, Neal Stephenson; what excites me about Doctorow is his capacity to work with ideas as Philip K. Dick did, but with significantly greater grace and êlan. Compare Down and Out with We Can Build You, not only because both deal with animatronic presidents, but also because both provoke questions about what makes feelings “real,” about manipulation and coercion of assent, about what makes a life meaningful. You will see, I think, that Dick’s brooding brilliance does not overshadow Doctorow’s truer gift for narrative and composition; where Dick got there first, Doctorow makes more of the elements, more satisfactorily. Down and Out in the Magic Kingdom breaks through not by virtue of being clever or portentous or literary or slick or even distinctively original, but by virtue of excelling at the job of writing vividly, lightly, about heavy topics—and such breakthroughs (like moving pictures, or flying steel) change things.
(By the way, don’t believe Amazon. The book will not be released on Dec. 31, 1969—it was released last week, has already been downloaded tens of thousands of times, and ascended at least for a while to #304 on the Amazon sales ranking system. Do believe Kevin Marks, who commends the HTML version that he and Dorothea Salo worked out. The PDF file conveniently downloads the whole book at once, but I find the HTML more readable. And, of course, buy multiple copies of the print edition, and check out “0wnz0red,” his short story published at salon.com.)
Posted by AKMA at January 12, 2003 12:58 PM | TrackBackAmazon apparently has something strange going on with its database--I've seen multiple blogs today about this or that book being last as released in 1969. Oh how the mighty have fallen. :-)
Posted by: Chris at January 12, 2003 02:56 PMI wonder if somewhere a script isn't being fed a date and is defaulting to just before the beginning of the Unix epoch (Jan. 1, 1970)?
(I had that happen to me, when I'd renamed a variable and then forgotten about it. then again, I'm much smaller than amazon!)
Posted by: elaine at January 13, 2003 06:15 PMWhuffie is the index of reputation on the OpenCola system, which Cory was involved with. That system has since died, but the people have moved on and the ideas persist.
In fact, there _are_ systems which attempt to measure Whuffie. I did my PhD research on "trust metrics," which are basically the same thing. Google's PageRank is also a decent model of Whuffie in the web world.
I have some thoughts about the choice of the word. When you take a look at slang word lists, you find that there are many words expressing high and low quality, but tied to the slang-using community. I think this is because it's often too easy to throw around words for quality even when it's not true. Thus, when hearing somebody extol or disparage something, your ear is often more tuned to the credibility of the speaker than to the denotative meaning. "That's a good car" and "that's a flossy ass car" denote the same, but only the latter connotes that the opinion probably comes from someone who does not consider Volvo station wagons to be good cars.
Similarly for "Whuffie". Saying "AKMA is a good person" is nice, but doesn't help identify the source or credibility of that opinion. By contrast, "AKMA has lots of Whuffie" clearly identifies the opinion as coming from someone who is very up to date in the online world.
So, it's kind of funny that a term that starts out as a narrow, community-specific approbation turns out (in the story) to be form of global, universal money replacement.
BTW, Joey De Villa (the Happiest Geek on Earth, and a colleague of Cory at OpenCola) has called me a "serious whuffie expert". I think I'd like that to be my formal title for my appointment to the U of Blogaria faculty.
Posted by: Raph Levien at January 14, 2003 02:32 AMRaph, I have to make some UBlog appointments this afternoon; I’ll try to remember to add you, too.
Does Whuffie confirm the biblical adage that a good name is more precious than great riches? Now, that would be a delicious turn! By the way, Cory tells me that "Whuffie" was a made-up word that he and his high-school friends used.
Now, I’m blogging about your site and my cross-eyed perception of some issues in trust metrics. Thank heaven I’m a theologian, and not responsible for math.
Posted by: AKMA at January 14, 2003 10:35 AM