I liked this book for its study of the human brain at different zoom levels; from the evolutionary scale of millions of years, our reptilian brain and deep-rooted animal instincts connecting us to the cranes, the intriguing species Powers has chosen to present his case. The narratives intertwining observations about the cranes, the water ways, and the human relationship to them (at once primevally close and irreparably distant) are beautifully woven and provide plenty of thought-provoking material. A nice example, which I won't include because it may possibly be a plot spoiler, is at the end of pg. 416/ top of pg. 417.Powers zooms in on the brain at the system level -- "unsponsored, impossible, near-omnipotent and infinitely fragile", it forges a coherent picture of the self, completely unique to each individual ("The man who had taught her than any life one came across was infinitely nuanced and irreproducible"). Then he goes deeper, lifting the cover and exploring the subparts, and how amazingly the system continues to function when they are damaged. Yet another level down to the neurons, the coldly scientific chemical reactions (eg -- Bonnie's distress at reading about the God module and the belief switch) and then in a circle back to the origin of everything, the chemical spark which created life in a single cell.I found many fascinating topics in every level of this examination, from discussions about empathy and our connection to other people, to the deeply personal perception of ourselves, seemingly continuous and stable yet scattered, fragile and mind-bogglingly complex underneath the surface.The reason I didn't really like this book is because of the characters and their stories. I get the feeling that they are mere vessels for the subjects I described above. The siblings with a bad childhood, the selfless environmentalist, the jerk who the girl keeps running back to, the mystery woman with a secret -- all of these are sort of flat stereotypes one finds in many American films/books/TV shows. The 'damaged', highly emotional, self-absorbed characters are a contrast to the intricate observations made about the functioning of the brain and humans in general. I liked the story of Gerald Weber and his wife a little better, maybe because it felt a bit more real to me. Lastly, I find the style of writing too choppy -- I often had to reread sentences and almost struggle to string together the meaning in a paragraph. The presentation lacks subtlety and has an in-your-face quality that sort of matches the state of disarray the characters are going through, but which does not make for smooth, continuous reading. As a result, it took me quite a while to finish this book, and there are probably many things I missed (for example, I was oblivious to the whole The Wizard of Oz theme until I read it in the Wikipedia entry after finishing the book... however, perhaps this is probably due to my own mediocre powers of observation). I think the writing style, together with my feelings about the characters, made it feel a little bit like I was plodding through a gray story, from one gem section about cranes or neuroscience to another. However, I should note that I thought the way the story was presented, switching between the perspectives of the main characters, is masterfully done (in the sense that Powers captures his characters' voice well, even though I may not appreciate the characters themselves).To conclude -- I would recommend this book to someone who is interested in neuroscience and the study of the way our brain functions and perceives the 'self' (especially from a more anecdotal, artistic perspective, rather than a purely clinical one), and who appreciates the higher-level exploration of topics such as the human connection with other species (in this case, the cranes) and with the environment (in this case, the inevitable exploitation of the river which is the cranes' migratory route stop). To me, that is the real strength of this book, and the actual plot and characters pale in comparison.
Flowers for Algernon for the new millennium!!!!!Okay, not really, no. Well, maybe a little...?The best parts of this book were those written from the perspective of a character with severe traumatic brain injury. The rest of it was good too, but the characters were never quite convincing enough for me to suspend my disbelief and actually care what happened to them. Of course, I was helplessly distracted the entire time by the Man Behind the Curtain. Does Richard Powers do all his own research? Where does Richard Powers live? Does he live in New York? Did Richard Powers haunt the neuroscience journal stacks of Columbia for two years while putting together this book? Because that is kind of what I was picturing. Also, for those who do not already know this, Richard Powers DOES NOT TYPE his novels. He hasn't in years. No, Richard Powers DICTATES his novels, using VOICE RECOGNITION SOFTWARE!!!How can I POSSIBLY focus on what's going on in the novel, when I'm grappling with an image of THAT the whole time???None of this is meant to imply that The Echo Maker is not engaging and absorbing fiction, because it definitely is. It is just not quite as engaging and absorbing as the idea of Richard Powers.But let's face it, that's some stiff competition.Does Richard Powers *really* know everything? Is Richard Powers a happy man? Is Richard Powers Richard Powers's real name? Does Richard Powers have children? Does Richard Powers have a dog? Does he love his dog? Does he love it more than he loves the children? Does Richard Powers really have the capacity to love, or is this somehow unusually difficult for him? Does Richard Powers feel smarter than everyone else? Does he feel smarter than his characters? If he really does know everything, it must be strange to write about people who do not. Can he empathize with them? Does he pity them? Or is he.... strangely, powerfully (!) jealous?Is it a great burden knowing everything? When Richard Powers was in elementary school, did some other kids call him a know-it-all? When he was younger, did Richard Powers smoke cigarettes? Has Richard Powers ever taken drugs? What are Richard Powers's friends like? Are they also famous writers? Is Richard Powers pleased when he is referred to as being a "writer's writer," or do you suppose he sometimes wisfully dreams of being more of a "reader's writer"....?Reading The Echo Maker will not definitively answer any of these questions. But if you read carefully, I'm sure you will notice some pretty big clues.
What do You think about The Echo Maker (2006)?
I picked up this book because I found the premise so interesting: a guy wakes up out of a coma and doesn't recognize his sister anymore. It's one of those rare brain injuries Oliver Sacks describes in The man who mistook his wife for a hat.But I had a lot of problems with this one. It's terribly longwinded; not just because of many descriptive passages about birds and brain damage, but also because the plot just dragged on without much development. Plus I disliked all the characters except for one (Mark, the guy with the brain injury). The only reason I finished it is that I couldn't figure out how it would end, but that turned out to be unsatisfying as well. This story simply didn't need that many words to reach the conclusion it reached, I think.But the brain injury is fascinating, and very well-described, so this novel was worth reading for that.
—Anne Marie
En estas cuatrocientas y pico páginas el autor hace una reflexión muy interesante sobre identidad frente a fisiología y química neurológica. Si una lesión cerebral es capaz de cambiar la personalidad de un individuo, ¿hasta qué punto podemos afirmar que somos lo que somos? Y lo genial del enfoque del autor es que su enfoque no es tanto la víctima del transtorno cerebral sino las personas que le rodean, Marc es incapaz de reconocer a su hermana como tal y esto va a ser para ella tan traumático e impactante como la lesión cerebral lo fue para él. El ser humano no se compone solamente de células y reacciones químicas sino que se nutre igualmente de sus interacciones sociales y estas van a ser tan determinantes para su carácter y comportamiento como los componentes fisiológicos. Un libro denso pero apasionante, una buena historia bien contada con personajes sólidos y con una buena carga de ciencia neurológica popular que no llega a hacerle sombra a las historias personales de los protagonistas. Si se coge con ganas puede ser una lectura inolvidable.
—Carmen Daza Márquez
This is the best Richard Powers I've read so far possibly because it continues to explore ideas that his other novels bring up. The Echo Maker is a great post-9/11 story about finding meaning in contemporary American Life and about what it means to be human when neuroscience increasingly sees the brain as a computer and the "mind" as nonexistent. But that's just what I think the Echo Maker is about because those messages resonate with me right now; you might find its other themes (the give and take involved in love, environmentalism v. development and "progress," the timelessness of nature...) more prominent or important. Whatever you take away from it, the Echo Maker contains some of Powers' best prose-- profound, beautiful, at times funny, and rarely over-written like some of his earlier work.
—Lindsay
