Multi-hyphenate artist James Franco is a man who enjoys challenging himself. In his book "Palo Alto," he discusses his attraction to exploring literature. After all, he's an actor who is hired to tell stories, so why not tell his own? The collection is based off of his own childhood, and centers around a group of teens in Palo Alto, CA as they find joy in the aimless moments of high school. There's frank talk about sex, random acts of vandalism, and even some questionable word choices. Franco's book is nothing if not vulgar in all of the ways of reckless abandon. However, there's also a sense that there's not a bigger purpose to any of what he has written, as most of it is simply short stories, told without exciting climaxes (in a sense). It does plenty to get inside the characters' heads, but the bigger issue is that cumulatively it doesn't add up to much of a satisfying read. It has some things that work, but not enough to establish Franco's stance as a writing virtuoso.
Among the general issues of Franco's writing is that his characters are vague. To be more specific, each chapter centers around a different character within his four person cast of characters. Sometimes it's a male character drinking and driving. Others it's a female character speculating on life as a potential love interest to a teacher. While each chapter eventually comes across clearer on who their protagonist is, the issue going in is that they're all the same. There's very little to distinguish them, even at times by gender, to make their stories have more of an impact. It may be done to show just how universal the teenage struggle is, but the specificity of these stories would suggest that some clarity would at least guide the reader in basic ways. To not know who the protagonist is robs everything that follows of certain fulfillment.
This wouldn't be an issue if the stories that Franco emphasized had something profound to say. Speaking as he claims that each character has some personal connection to his own childhood, it's disappointing that the only thing he captures is atmosphere. Every character seems aimless, mostly having pointless conversations and trying to avoid being caught by the police. In the few moments where the book has tension, Franco captures the awkwardness of youth perfectly by reflecting their own confusion with the world, such as when a friend visits a library only to complain that a story someone likes is "gay." Why? Because "children's stories are gay." Again, Franco is unashamed about playing blue with his characters (there are some racial epithets that get explored in the book). However, these moments end up not leading to any profound realization or achievement in a grander narrative. There's not even a hidden, subtextual connection other than that each of these characters existed in Palo Alto.
Franco is arguably talented or at least ambitious enough to make art that he thinks matters. Considering that he has done some impressive work, it's a bit disappointing to find his writing skills a bit underwhelming. The book could do with a clearer connection between the stories. Instead, it's about sexual conquests, getting high with shady neighbors, and maybe murdering someone. Individually, these would make for exciting moments. However, they're just as aimless as the characters, and Franco never thinks to make them matter as formative events, never building one story upon another. It's hard to even do that, given that these characters are often vague for their entire stories, never allowing for a deeper emotional resonance to establish.
One of the saving graces of Franco's book is that he was smart enough to turn it over to someone else for a film adaptation. In this case, he turned to first time director Gia Coppola (who is related to THOSE Coppolas) and produced a film that whittles away the hormonal jokes about homophobia, racism, sexual humiliation, and other problematic elements in favor of a more introspective story. In one sense, it is a different film because of how refined and connected it all is. However, it's still the same story because it captures the moments that Franco tried to capture in more clairvoyant fashion. Coppola feels like she understands "Palo Alto" better than the author does, and that's both a minus and a plus. For one, it's easier to convey the characters when you know who is talking.
"Palo Alto" doesn't establish Franco as a quintessential actor-turned-author. If anything, it's a decent attempt at capturing the teenage mindset in its most honest and vulgar form. However, it still often reads like it has no purpose, even within its own chapters. None of the characters are necessarily as exciting as they are in the subsequent Coppola adaptation, and it does reflect a juvenile style of writing both in humor and in structure. The book could've been better had there been more effort to make the story something grander, if the aimless moments added up to something besides joking about your friend being a homosexual. There's something here, and the movie captured it, but there's not much else that's reassuring enough to recommend to fans of the film.
No comments:
Post a Comment