The end
One thing that I noticed early on in this book is how it seems to oppose a real mystery story. The story throws clues at Oedipa and everything gets more and more confusing as time goes on. Each clue she receives just makes the story more difficult to understand. This is seen very well in chapter 5 when she goes on a walk and she sees that everything is connected to Tristero and the postal horn. Another big thing is that everyone seem's to know more about these mysterious things then she does. The final scene which is meant to tie everything together and bring clarity to the situation ends up making things even worse. We find out that the one person who's identity can solve the entire story ends up staying a mystery. This is opposed to the usually style of mystery stories, which pride themselves on revealing the true answer at the end and showing how everything was connected the whole time. This story is the complete opposite of what a mystery should be.
I agree that it is a very frustrating end to a mystery story, perhaps it is a parody of the genre itself. What it does have in common is that clues are revealed throughout the story-slowly at first but the frequency and importance of them increases as the plot progresses. As you said, the difference is that the clues aren't particularly helpful to the reader and we don't get a full explanation at the end. It is not uncommon for the reader to be confused near the end of a mystery story (like right before Holmes explains everything), but we have no final explanation and it seems not enough evidence to figure it out for ourselves. I think maybe this is showing that even in a outlandish, fictional world such as that in Lot 49, there isn't always a clean, tidy ending.
ReplyDeleteThis is entire story I believe is critiquing the various aspects of the mystery novel. Is there an actual mystery? Maybe, but Oepida could just be crazy. The ending is left open ended, and it is up to us to decide whether or not any of this holds any ground.
ReplyDelete