Raintree County again

I mentioned that I was reading Raintree County. I have been thinking about writing about it here and have not summoned the courage. A friend just asked me whether I was finished with it yet and whether I thought she would like it. Here is how I responded:

I have not yet finished it. I am not sure that I am enjoying it all that much.

It is over-written, over-organized, over-constructed, just over done.

He plays with time. It is a day in the life of one man (July 4, 1892) interrupted with flashbacks of his past. The flashbacks are the real story, but they are told out of order -- so he creates suspense by telling most of the events in a space of pages, but leaves the climactic event until near the end of the book. (Thus, in 1863, Susanna leaves home with their 2-year-old son and he tracks them to Indianapolis. Then he follows them back to Freehaven. We skip a week and he is off to war, Susanna having left to return to New Orleans. Not until many many many pages later -- I skipped ahead to look -- are we told that Susanna set fire to their house; the boy was killed. And in another section we learn of Susanna's later suicide.) He has an elaborate system of symbols about earth and water and swamp and river; he overlays all kinds of mythic elements.

The movie tried to tell the central story, but botched it badly in order to make a happy ending.