Fans of Carol Shields have gotten together to build a labyrinth in her honor.
Catherine Shields, the third of Shields's five children and the only one still in Winnipeg, said her mother developed a fascination with mazes and labyrinths later in her life."I think it was evident in her work," the daughter said. "She liked the idea of being somewhere and not knowing exactly where you were going."
Lost? Do explain. Is it because of Shields' free-flowing narratives? For my money, her novels are some of the most underrated profiles of human behavior of the past twenty years. Even in her weaker works (such as "Larry's Party"), the way that Shields uses letters, photographs, and time to plot human development reveals fascinating and unexpected connections which reveal truth along the lines of Balzac, but provide us with enough enigma to draw our own conclusions about the characters. That Shields did this repeatedly with sparse yet poetic language is no less incredible. I've never understood why "The Stone Diaries" is so maligned among U.S. literary circles. Granted, "Unless" is the better book of the two. But is it because of the awards? Is it because of the lack of closure? Or is it inexcusable for enigma to be executed so cleanly?
Posted by: Ed | September 30, 2004 at 07:55 AM