BOWL OF CHERRIES

"I needed stimulation, source material, reference works, and like a wretch in a famine intoxicated by the remembrance of a full pot simmering on the stove, so my nostrils inhaled the imaginary smell of books, that delicate and overpowering perfume nothing on earth could match, not fresh-mown hay, not automobile leather, not vulval musk."
—page 60, Bowl of Cherries by Millard Kaufman

Bowl of Cherries is a great wild ride, a coming of age novel with a cast of off-kilter characters. It is also tongue-in-cheek satire that skewers the military-industrial complex, scientific inquiry, religious belief, metaphysical ramblings, colonialism, imperialism, capitalism, the police state, authority, rampant individualism, community and its attendant "mob mentality," romance, and the pursuit of resources. It does all of this with a rich and chewy vocabulary that challenges and thrills. Unfortunately, the novel loses steam in its final pages as the climax of the book becomes predictable, improbable, and overly cinematic. But, even that cannot diminish the fun that this book provides its reader.

Imagery from the story kept creeping into my thoughts for days after I finished the book. Some images were fueled by words and phrases, old and new, that kept the pages filled with its refreshing and crisp language. Others were provoked by the overabundance of scatological humor of the setting and the hormonal urges of protagonist Judd Breslau, who is both child prodigy and academic über-slacker.

The other reason the story resonated for so long after the narrative itself ended was the examination of familial relationships, similar to that of An Arsonist's Guide to Writers' Homes in New England. What is the importance of father to child, mother to child, father to mother? Can others substitute for these relationships, if they have been damaged beyond repair? And, what happens if these relationships turn out to be other than previously believed or imagined? These are issues that both An Arsonist's Guide and Bowl of Cherries tackle with some objectivity. The relationships are laid bare and we are invited to struggle with what we see. We have to look at the lives of the characters and see pieces of our selves reflected back in the mirrors of their lives. The question is: Do we like what we see?