BOOKS

For those of you physics nerds out there, you may have recognized the equation for velocity up there.
Velocity = Initial Velocity (Vo) + (Acceleration x Time)
Note: Velocity is not the same thing as Speed. its a whole lot awesomer.

ANYWAY.

why am i telling you this?

because I just finished reading a book entitled You Shall Know our Velocity by Dave Eggers.
This is important to know because
A) Eggers is awesome
B) I’m about to babble about said book for a good half hour
C) all of the above.

ready go.

alright, well the thing is, when i first picked up this book, my sister told me (sarcastically, of course) that i must be pretty “deep” to be reading something by Dave Eggers, because thats what all the indie kids to, they sit in their coffee shops thinking they’re better than everyone and reading things like Dave Eggers books and the like.
Note: I have always wanted to be one of those kids.
So basically I just took it as a compliment and started on with my book.

The premise of the book is basically this: 2 guys, the Narrator (Will) and his friend Hand (who’s real name is Justin) lose their best friend Jack in a horrendous car accident (the word horrendous is way too hard for me to spell) involving a semi-truck. Not long before that happened, Will received a large sum of money. Will doesn’t want or need this money, because he feels like he doesn’t deserve it, and it isn’t his money. So he wants to spend it on a huge round-the-world trip with hand. 7 days, $32,000 dollars to give away to whomever they see fit.

After finishing the book, I’m still not entirely sure I understand it. I mean I think i get it, but i’m still not really sure if what i think i get is what i’m SUPPOSED to get, what Eggers wanted me to pull away from this book.

the message that i’m getting is that this book is essentially religious, in a way.
its not like, ramming Jesus down my throat (which is why i enjoyed the book and am enjoying analyzing it, instead of vomiting all over it. i hate books that are all about Christianity.)
the essential issue that the book is grappling with is Balance vs. Chaos, and whether or not either one exists.

is there retribution? is there balance?
or is it all chaos and no logic.

so many people i think believe that both are possible, they think that they deserve to be paid back for good deeds they do, but don’t think that anything bad they do will get punished…or vice versa (good deeds won’t get rewarded, but bad deeds will be treated with vengence.)

me? i’m a firm believer in the theory of Balance, it hink that everything is held in a balance, that somehow everything is kept in balance.
this is the theory that appears to be held by Will, the writer, except he often gets confused.
the other theory seems to be held by Hand, who in fact says (at least in Will’s head he says this) “No. There is no balance, and no retribution, and no rules. The rules and balances you blather about are hopeful creations of a man fearing death.”

later, he also says (this is within the same conversation, which i think is the whole point of the book, the reason why Eggers wrote it…the conversation, not this particular quote) “Well now you’re contradicting yourself. With balance there cannot be chaos. With randomness there can be no punishment. You’re pleading for punishment in hopes that you’ll see your God. Without punishment there is no God. If there is balance then there is your Lord. If balance then Afterlife.”

the thing is, this whole “conversation” takes place within Will’s head. not like, schizophrenic-like (though i thought that was the whole point of the book for a long time, but it isn’t.) so really the whole book is about Will trying to come to terms with either the fact that there IS balance, and therefore God exists, or there is Chaos, and therefore there is no God.

i haven’t decided which side Eggers believes in, but i think thats the point.

the thing is, i still have this nagging feeling that i missed something important. i don’t know why. i mean, i think i’ve gotten the most important part of the whole thing, the philosophical debate…but it was all so painfully obvious, and i feel like it shouldn’t be.

plus i feel like there are so many questions left unanswered…but i think maybe thats just Eggers trying to point out that in life, questions go unanswered. but i don’t know what that means, if that means that because questions have no answers, there’s no balance and everything is random, or if questions have no answers BECAUSE there’s balance and we just can’t see the answers or there doesn’t need to be answers or something.

i have the feeling that Eggers believes in Chaos. thats the vibe i’m getting from the questions + answers little bit. but i don’t know.

for all i know i could be over-analyzing the shit out of this.

plus i’m still confused about the beginning, because in the beginning, Eggers makes a point of saying “Everything within takes place after Jack died and before my mom and I drowned in a burning ferry inthe cool Tannin-tinted Guaviare River in East-Central Colombia, with forty-two locals we hadn’t yet met.”

WHY IS HE TELLING US THAT!

see, just when i have this book figured out, i find something that sends it all to hell. i don’t even understand the beginning of the book, the very first sentance confuses me. how am i to presume i understand the rest?

i don’t know. but i would definitly and whole-heartedly reccommend this book to anyone and everyone, because it brings up some really interesting issues and is just overall entertaining.

and in a few months, when i’ve had some time to ponder this whole deal, i will probably go out and buy this book (in hardcover, because the hardcover version is really interesting. the book starts on the front cover.) and i will read it again and make more sense of it, or none at all.
because thats the type of book it is, you know? you read and read and read and you make more or less sense of it each time, and you always find something new.

i love it, i really do.