The Circle by Dave Eggers

analysis
#1

My wife asked me to read The Circle by Dave Eggers because she already did and she knows I would like the genre of this book, but she warned me that she felt that there was something wrong with it structure-wise. And she was right.

Beware of some spoilers ahead…

Although the topic fascinates me, the ending ruined the book in my opinion. There is a main character (Mae) and an influence character (her mysterious lover that turns out to be one of the founders of the company). But both remain steadfast towards the story’s main conflict; neither of them change. This maybe could work sometimes, but Mae makes all kinds of stupid decisions concerning privacy and openness. Her lover tries to convince her of her idiocy, but at the end she remains stupid. A story can end in many ways, but not like this (IMHO). It made me want to scream at the book; how can anyone be so… Aaargh!

Do you agree?

DUG: Stories for the New Decade
#2

Haven’t read it, but…

I believe MC / IC Resolve is unconnected to the main conflict. When you’re looking at the story from the OS perspective, you’re simply seeing how the ants crawl about the landscape, not how those ants are haunted or afflicted by personal issues.

Change / Steadfast is in regard to the MC’s personal problem, something it would be dealing with regardless of the main conflict. So you would ask if Mae or her mysterious lover retain or abandon their personal approach to conflict, without considering how they act as protagonist or sidekick or whatever.

From this angle, would the story be less aggravating? Or does your original criticism still apply?

#3

I sometimes make mistakes in my wording, but I think my original criticism still applies.

The story is basically about the dilemma between privacy and transparency. A technology company that tries to promote transparency. It claims people should not have privacy, because only criminals have things to hide. Mae works for this company and decides to ‘go public’ to be a good example. The company tries to ‘close the circle’, meaning that everyone needs to be forced to be open about everything. Her lover is a very secretive man who pops in and out of her life. He is one of the founders of the company who changed his mind about the company policy a long time ago. He tries to convince her that it is a bad idea to close the circle (and I would agree with him). She does it anyway. The ending ruined the book for me.

#4

Hmmmm, this still sounds like Overall Story to me.

You have The Circle company, which is in Pursuit of total transparency. You have Mae, who Helps and/or Supports the company by making herself transparent. And you have the secretive founder who is in opposition to this (Avoid and/or Oppose)

Does Mae bring something with her (before she is hired at the Circle) that you could say is her personal issue? What drives her to put herself on the line for the company like this? What is she trying to justify?

I guess what I’m asking is – is there a Main Character Throughline?

#5

Don’t forget, mysteries are os mainly, and romances are mc/ic mainly.

#6

Wouldn’t all 4 throughlines be different ways to look at the same topic? To take the example of the battle “they” are in. “I” am a soldier who is interrupted by “you”, and “we” need to find our way through this. This is very related to each other; “I” wouldn’t be a soldier if there wouldn’t be a war, unless my name is Don Quixote.

Similar in this story. “They” are a company that wants openness. That forces “M(a)e” to ask if she has anything to hide. I don’t remember her backstory; I would have to re-read it to see if she brought any personal issues with her into the story. Maybe her lack of issues makes her decide that she can be transparent. The only thing that is holding her back and gives her some longing for privacy, is her love life. Her blooming RS with a man who wants to be very secretive. (I thought romances would be RS, btw.)

Please don’t think I’m trying to be stubborn. I try to understand. And one of the issues I am having in my own writing is how to deal with the relatedness of the 4 throughlines to each other.
–––––––––––
*EDIT
I discussed this with my wife who suggested the book to me in the first place. According to her, Mae wants to belong. She is willing to sacrifice her privacy to belong to the company. Her lover proves that he can belong to it while maintaining his personal integrity. I think she is right.

#7

Now we’re talking. She craves a community, and this drives her to yield up individuality in order to please the group. This is something she would be driven by whether she was working at The Circle or not.

Of course this is fairly common to humanity, the balance between self and group, so I’m curious as to why she’s so willing to tip the scales in favor of the group, to the point that she wants everyone’s thoughts to be public by the end.

At this point, I will need to read the book to be of any help in discussion. From your earlier descriptions, I wondered if there was simply a lack of MC Throughline, which would explain your frustration with Mae’s choices. But now there are lots of possibilities.

#8

What my wife said about the MC throughline is definitely in there.

It is a good book, but I suggest you trash the last page and write your own. It probably is better than the one you ripped out.

#9

From your wife’s description it sounds like Failure bad

#10

Yes a mc/ic is a rs.

#11

I haven’t read the book but sometimes we anticipate one thing, and we are given another. Maybe, the writer and editor mixed things up. From the plot summary, maybe the writer wanted to leave the reader ripped up with unsatisfied rage and impotent anger, hoping to create more caution in society. I’d say a betrayal of the RS teamwork expectation for the mindless acceptance as a stepford corporation clone as the ideal of life. The corp was probably the antagonist who seduced her and won her. To put this in historical context, Mansfield Park by Jane Austen had the wrong ending, resulting in a million romances where Henry Crawford got the girl (or more importantly the girl got Henry). Never say I won’t comfort a devastated reader on the drop of a keystroke.

#12

You are right; it is definitely a failure bad story. But that is not the problem. I enjoyed King Kong. Amadeus is an absolute masterpiece. And Ex Machina even had a ‘betrayed by the love interest’ thing going on, similar to The Circle.

And I believe you are spot on, saying “the writer wanted to leave the reader ripped up with unsatisfied rage and impotent anger, hoping to create more caution in society”. That was definitely what he was going for. But this is like the rule about showing a gun in the beginning of the movie: it has to go off. But it doesn’t. That is what is frustrating about this book. The MC has a huge blind spot that made me yell at her: “Come on, how thick can you be?” for a few hundred pages. And then at the very end, she doesn’t change. It is like Monty Python and the Holy Grail; they work towards an epic ending and then it doesn’t happen. I can forgive Monty Python because we know they are messing with us. But this feels similar, yet I am supposed to take it seriously?

If she changed her mind, but it was too late and the bad guys win, end of story, that would have been a great failure bad ending with probably more societal impact because everyone would loved it. Now the message seems to be: “Beware of women in high ranking who are as dumb as a doorknob.” I don’t think that is the author’s intend.

#13

Writers do have their blind spots, too. I met a librarian who was of the opinion that the first three HP books were the best because the writer then gained control of editing after, due to great success. Then again, I could relate to a ticked off writer using a character and/or story as a personal issue punching bag, unconsciously. Freud did develop his theory working with educated people and “society”, right? How many TV series have ended on real dud endings, most likely due to an ego in control running amok with personal opinion, of the moment. Hey, we’re only human.

Alan Alda has said on record he regrets having had the doctors depend on alcohol (and their still I guess) as a coping mechanism. A creative idea of the moment might not live through changing societal mores. Maybe, it was supposed to be funny. And is it “dumb as a doorknob” or protecting a position? (thinking back on some previous job environments} Maybe, there is some kind of transition weakness, which the Dramatica theory addresses. I remember a workshop where the importance of sticking to Dramatica genre sequence was discussed, and Hudson Hawk was given as an example of mixing up which made a mess of the film.

It sounds like the writer was going for a Stepford Person-type satire of the workplace and miscalculated.

#14

I just learned that this book is going to be adapted into a movie, with Tom Hanks and Emma Watson in the leading roles. I’m curious to see what they do with it.

#15

I have read the book this week (in German, so I might mix up some terms), and I don’t think it’s a Failure/Bad story.

The Overall story seems to be about “completing the circle”: everyone is concerned about it, everyone relevant is either for or against it. The antagonist seems to be Kalden/Ty. Optionlock - ways of completing the circle.

Just from the overall perspective, the problem is that the antagonist does not really do much most of the time. In addition, it’s kind of like Jim’s analysis of “Children of Men” iirc, in that the last part is not shown. We don’t see the completion of the circle, but we don’t really assume that it won’t be completed? It seems inevitable. It’s also somewhat like Apt Pupil, in that it’s an outcome/judgment that the audience does not agree with. It’s clearly a cautionary tale with Success/Good.

I think the story has very little IC and RS, which leaves the story sort of… heartless? Furthermore, it seems to be written by someone who doesn’t really know much about the theme, or the people he is criticizing. Strawmen everywhere, preaching to the choir, and a Main Character who does not think much further than two steps.