Notes: Flowers for Algernon, by Daniel Keyes

A few notes on the book.

I've been gluttonous for sci-fi lately - it comes every few years, I need to read another 2 dozen books in a row - and I picked this up, having read the novella on which the novel is based in some middle-school anthology, maybe when I was 12. It's a sci-fi classic, the blurb says, but it's really a nearly-pure tragedy, written as the diary of a 30-something retarded man, given an operation to improve his intelligence, who becomes a genius, then watches his genius fade.

In the first 50 pages the dramatic irony of retarded Charlie, I.Q. 68, who writes ad nauseum about how smart he's going to be, does not achieve the effect intended - it's too procedural, predictable, and the reader is over-conscious of the author as he struggles to tell a story through the eyes of a barely literate man. It would have been better to use less first-person Charlie along with other “primary sources” - snatches of dialogue, doctor's reports, or an omniscient narrator, bring us into Charlie's mind from other sources.

Dating the prose, the book also is endlessly Freudian as Charlie chews through his relationship with his mother and seeks to overcome sexual repression; he succeeds, and I felt chilled, indifferent. Another 60s book with a similar narrative approach, and many of the same flaws: A Patch of Blue. The diary of the outsider: retarded, or blind, through whom the reader is to learn empathy for the different. But A Patch of Blue's didacticism overwhelmed the story; Flowers for Algernon's is thankfully subsumed by well-drawn characters.

With character as focus, the second half succeeds as tragedy. Or, as above, a nearly-pure tragedy. Charlie becomes tragic: his hubris expands; he becomes cold and unbearable. But this is coincidental. The agents of his fate, technology, science, medicine, make their decisions with stochastic methods. In this case they cause not real death, but mental death, even more tragic; at the end we're left trying to reach Charlie, and he's trying to reach himself, but he's lost to us.

At the end of the novel the dramatic irony is folded over, becomes part of the character's own assessment of himself. He researches his own condition and discovers that he will regress, incurably; he writes a paper on his condition at the peak of his powers, then finds himself unable to understand it, in an agony the whole way. The night after I read the book I lay in bed and tried to make the story end differently before I could sleep, give Lear back his kingdom, bring Ophelia back from the dead, give Charlie a working brain. Finding new stories, the ones that keep the reader from sleeping. Keyes is no great stylist, and he's written hardly anything since, but he managed to find where the tragic is now, not in betrayal by your daughters, or your uncle killing your father and marrying your mother; that's talk-show material, but in the cancer cure that does not work, the pills with symptoms as bad as the disease, the air bag that kills the child upon release. We have no fatal flaws ourselves; we are surrounded by them, dancing with them, forced to live with them in order to survive.




Ftrain.com is the website of Paul Ford and his pseudonyms. It is showing its age. I'm rewriting the code but it's taking some time.


There is a Facebook group.


You will regret following me on Twitter here.


Enter your email address:

A TinyLetter Email Newsletter

About the author: I've been running this website from 1997. For a living I write stories and essays, program computers, edit things, and help people launch online publications. (LinkedIn). I wrote a novel. I was an editor at Harper's Magazine for five years; then I was a Contributing Editor; now I am a free agent. I was also on NPR's All Things Considered for a while. I still write for The Morning News, and some other places.

If you have any questions for me, I am very accessible by email. You can email me at ford@ftrain.com and ask me things and I will try to answer. Especially if you want to clarify something or write something critical. I am glad to clarify things so that you can disagree more effectively.


Syndicate: RSS1.0, RSS2.0
Links: RSS1.0, RSS2.0


© 1974-2011 Paul Ford


@20, by Paul Ford. Not any kind of eulogy, thanks. And no header image, either. (October 15)

Recent Offsite Work: Code and Prose. As a hobby I write. (January 14)

Rotary Dial. (August 21)

10 Timeframes. (June 20)

Facebook and Instagram: When Your Favorite App Sells Out. (April 10)

Why I Am Leaving the People of the Red Valley. (April 7)

Welcome to the Company. (September 21)

“Facebook and the Epiphanator: An End to Endings?”. Forgot to tell you about this. (July 20)

“The Age of Mechanical Reproduction”. An essay for TheMorningNews.org. (July 11)

Woods+. People call me a lot and say: What is this new thing? You're a nerd. Explain it immediately. (July 10)

Reading Tonight. Reading! (May 25)

Recorded Entertainment #2, by Paul Ford. (May 18)

Recorded Entertainment #1, by Paul Ford. (May 17)

Nanolaw with Daughter. Why privacy mattered. (May 16)

0h30m w/Photoshop, by Paul Ford. It's immediately clear to me now that I'm writing again that I need to come up with some new forms in order to have fun here—so that I can get a rhythm and know what I'm doing. One thing that works for me are time limits; pencils up, pencils down. So: Fridays, write for 30 minutes; edit for 20 minutes max; and go whip up some images if necessary, like the big crappy hand below that's all meaningful and evocative because it's retro and zoomed-in. Post it, and leave it alone. Can I do that every Friday? Yes! Will I? Maybe! But I crave that simple continuity. For today, for absolutely no reason other than that it came unbidden into my brain, the subject will be Photoshop. (Do we have a process? We have a process. It is 11:39 and...) (May 13)

That Shaggy Feeling. Soon, orphans. (May 12)

Antilunchism, by Paul Ford. Snack trams. (May 11)

Tickler File Forever, by Paul Ford. I'll have no one to blame but future me. (May 10)

Time's Inverted Index, by Paul Ford. (1) When robots write history we can get in trouble with our past selves. (2) Search-generated, "false" chrestomathies and the historical fallacy. (May 9)

Bantha Tracks. (May 5)

Tables of Contents