Close Menu
    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
    CNQ
    • Issues
      • Number 114
      • Number 113
      • Number 112
      • Number 111
      • Number 110
      • Number 109
      • Number 108
      • Number 107
      • Number 106
      • Number 105
      • Number 104
      • Number 103
      • Number 102
      • Archive
    • Magazine
      • About
      • Contests
      • Advertise
      • Submissions
      • Where to Buy
      • Subscribe
      • Promotional Subscriptions
      • Contact
    • Features
      • Web Exclusive
      • Essays
        • CanLitCrit Essay Contest
      • Interviews
      • Reviews
      • CNQ Abroad
      • Poetry
      • Short Fiction
      • The North Wing
      • The Dusty Bookcase
      • Profiles in Bookselling
      • Used and Rare
    CNQ

    Mike Steeves’ Giving Up
    by Jeff Bursey

    0
    By CNQ Team on February 24, 2016 Reviews
    Giving Up
    Mike Steeves
    Book Thug, 2015
    214 pages

    Mike Steeves’ debut novel, Giving Up, takes readers inside a tense relationship. It has three sections focusing on events that take place on the same night. Each section is presented from a separate point of view and takes the form of a single paragraph, within which Mary and James circle around their own set of concerns and anxieties. The layout brings to mind, among other examples, Thomas Bernhard’s novels and William Gaddis’ Agapē Agape; the content will be familiar to anyone who has been in a committed relationship that hit some bumps.

    The first section tracks James’s thoughts as he contemplates his mysterious life’s work. He considers the obstacles he places in the way of completing this “something extraordinary” that he’s been labouring on for twenty years, and his avoidance of the “traps” he believes Mary “is constantly setting” for him with her remarks and questions. He then thinks of the break he made from his work on the night he met a conman (who divested him of $400), and his return home.

    The “Mary” section is about what she does online that same evening. She experiences misery over seeing Facebook pages of friends with happy lives complete with children, as this triggers a sense of absence in her own life (she has been trying to get pregnant with James). She also reflects upon James’s deceitful character, the sudden presence of a cat that’s broken into their home, and her violent response to this creature’s presence.

    “James and Mary,” the final section, takes place later on the same night, bookending the argument that occurred before the book opens and uniting the two characters as they explore what each has gone through. All three sections feature tense exchanges, where James and Mary doggedly question each other. Both feel hounded.

    Mary’s remark that she can’t trust anything stems from an analysis of her reproductive possibilities, but it soon becomes apparent that her lack of trust applies generally: to her “friends” on Facebook, to the evidence of her senses, and to James and their relationship. It is also a theme that the novel explores in other ways. James’ section begins “The world is full of uplifting stories…” and Mary’s second thought is that “For some reason we treat it like it’s a big secret” (“it” referring to the difficulty in becoming pregnant). Both statements indicate different approaches to reality: to tell stories and keep secrets. Despite the occasional heartfelt and sincere admission we are led to wonder: What can we trust?

    Paradoxically, Mary has few problems in knowing what she can rely on:

    [James is]  into nuance, the grey area. I’m more of a black and whiter, myself. I know that the world is really complex and that nothing is ever one hundred percent, that you can’t ever really know the truth about anything and all that crap, but that’s not really how it feels. For me, there’s not a whole lot of complexity. There’s zero nuance. The feeling I have pretty much all the time is that the truth is staring me directly in the face, like right up in my face, breathing all over me and looking deep into my eyes, and just like in real life, if someone is standing that close with their face pressed up against your face so that your noses are touching, looking you right in the eye, it’s only natural to look away.

     

    Mary pits intellectual processes against emotions, and this results in a predictable conflict: her logical mind wins the battle, but the war was won by feeling a long time ago.

    On the thematic and structural level, Giving Up represents a similar struggle by placing the characters in specific, symbolic locations. The epigraph to the first section, by Søren Kierkegaard, says that people with houses “prefer to live in the basement.” This is where James spends his time working on the life-consuming project that Steeves rightly leaves mysterious. (The couple’s occupations are similarly undefined, but we get the impression that they are confined to offices.) James despairs at the thought of tying himself to an unrealizable achievement – “Basically I have been wasting my time…” – and there is a certain amount of self-abasement, as well as self-pity, in his underground environment. These feelings, combined with his distrust of Mary, his awareness that he lies to her, and his knowledge that she knows he lies, take up much of his section; the rest is given over to his belief in and acceptance of a conman’s ludicrous story involving a money order.

    Aside from the street scenes, it’s only in the third section of the novel that we see James come out of the basement. In contrast, Mary’s section is set on the main floor, and includes all of her debilitating interactions with Facebook and her attack on an unknown cat.

    The set-up is deliberate: basement versus first floor, the unconscious and unexamined mind versus the conscious and analytical. Mary’s words about the absolute nature of Truth gain resonance from this classic confrontation between desires and appetites and an examination of their relationship. While the two levels (or stories) in their home intersect, especially at the end of the novel, as spaces packed with symbolism they cannot individually offer the possibility of full understanding.

    We learn things from Mary’s account that are unflattering about James. Apart from her mistrust of him, Mary dislikes that he pretends to want a child as much as she does. The endless campaign to have a child requires sex every day, an activity that never enters James’ narrative, but though they fail, day after day and year after year, she rejects his suggestion that they see someone who could find out what might be the impediment. “Instead of telling him the real reason I’m reluctant to go see a specialist, I make something up based on opinions and beliefs I don’t possess but that I know from experience will drive him into an exasperated rage.” Mary, who never reveals her real reason, and who plays as fast and loose with the idea of candor as James, is driven by his pattern of random lying (on viewing porn, on eating out, on his life’s work) to diminish him. To her he is “needy,” and Mary deploys a word that for some time has been condoned when applied to women: “I end up saying the very thing that will make him hysterical.” The key word there is always; she regularly pushes him into a defensive posture, which he abets by refusing to reveal his fears and motivations. Yet she also tries to back away from the domestic scene she has depicted: “But now that I’m telling this I feel like I’m painting an ugly picture of our relationship. The majority of the time we’re great.” But the ugly picture comes across as more truthful than her explanation.

    The emotions present in both streams of consciousness are set down by Steeves in sentences that appear to flow naturally in voice. Here is James as he listens to the conman tell his endless fabrication:

    ‘This must be what it’s like for my friends and family,’ I thought. ‘They must get embarrassed when they have to listen to me go on about my life’s work. They know that I’m lying when I tell them that I think I’ll finish the project that I’m currently working on in another year or so. It’s painfully obvious to my wife that I am conning her, putting one over on her, so to speak, when, after a doubly wasteful and destructive day down in the basement, I tell her that I got a lot of work done.’

     

    And here is Mary: “… at that moment what I truly believed in my heart of hearts was that this cat was deliberately messing with me, or that someone had sent it in order to mess with me.” Despite the stated feelings operating on the surface, and the necessarily repetitive nature of their voices, their upset and fears are carefully phrased, and expressed in an orderly rhetorical fashion with well-balanced clauses showing no signs of hesitation or error of speech. The repeated use of the word that, for example, establishes a coolness in the lines that keeps emotional engagement at a distance. Such well-organized sentences may not bother readers just thankful to read articulate thoughts, but others may find that they vitiate Steeves’ attempt to describe the ebb and flow of the feelings of a miserable couple.

    The authorial style takes over at the end of Giving Up. In “James and Mary” the ambiguities of the first two sections gradually are replaced and answered by a voice that has only rarely occurred previously. One sees, with a sense of disappointment, signs of a tidy and unearned rapprochement approaching well out from the last pages. Both characters finally express a small amount of what has been unsaid for so long, indicating a shift from their habitual ways of speaking and listening. As they are maneuvered into seeing what their chief problem is, and with time running out, there arrives a contemporary version of the deus ex machina: a doorbell ringing at midnight marking a magical, mystical cutoff point. Afraid, James and Mary retreat to the basement and have make-up sex before thinking about returning upstairs to face the stranger at the door, whether it be the cat owner, the conman, or the police. In this final section elaborate rationales are provided, and there is an all-knowingness in the narrative voice that works against the fumbling and self-deception that Mary and James exhibit.

    Mike Steeves’ awareness of what couples do within a relationship, and his effort to capture domestic politics, complete with all of its twists and stories-within-stories, is admirable. And Giving Up contains some home truths. But the novel could afford to be more unkempt, and its sentimental conclusion removes its harshness and momentum. A history of compulsive and obsessive behaviour, ceaseless lying, paranoia, and hopelessness can’t be offset by one fear-filled fuck.

    From CNQ 93 (Summer 2015)

    Related Posts

    Jana Prikryl’s Midwood
    by Andreae Callanan

    Tolu Oloruntoba’s Each One a Furnace
    by Kevin Spenst

    Madhur Anand’s Parasitic Oscillations
    by Shani Mootoo

    Comments are closed.


    CNQ Issue 114:
    Fall/Winter 2023


    Subscribe & Save! Within Canada, with free shipping:

    Subscribe & Save! Outside Canada, with free shipping:

    Recent Articles
    June 30, 2023

    On Upstart & Crow
    by Zoe Grams

    March 28, 2023

    Jana Prikryl’s Midwood
    by Andreae Callanan

    March 20, 2023

    Spring Is Here
    by David Mason

    Recent Posts
    • On Upstart & Crow
      by Zoe Grams
    • Jana Prikryl’s Midwood
      by Andreae Callanan
    • Spring Is Here
      by David Mason
    • Where East Meets West
      by J R Patterson
    • Tolu Oloruntoba’s Each One a Furnace
      by Kevin Spenst
    Recent Comments
    • theresa on Don Coles’ A Serious Call
      by David Godkin
    • Mother, Wife, Author and Professor – O'Niel Barrington Blair on Meaghan Strimas
    • Vol. 1 Brooklyn | Afternoon Bites: Yaa Gyasi Interviewed, Justin Torres Nonfiction, Janice Lee on Fritters, Karen Russell, and More on Amy Jones interviewed
      by Brad de Roo
    • Pinball: A Walking Tour by Emily Donaldson – CNQ | Fun With Bonus on Pinball: A Walking Tour
      by Emily Donaldson
    • admin on Interview with Helen Kahn
      by Jason Dickson
    Archives
    • June 2023
    • March 2023
    • February 2023
    • January 2023
    • December 2022
    • November 2022
    • October 2022
    • September 2022
    • August 2022
    • July 2022
    • June 2022
    • April 2022
    • January 2022
    • November 2021
    • June 2021
    • May 2021
    • April 2021
    • February 2021
    • January 2021
    • November 2020
    • August 2020
    • April 2020
    • March 2020
    • February 2020
    • June 2019
    • May 2019
    • April 2019
    • March 2019
    • January 2019
    • November 2018
    • October 2018
    • September 2018
    • August 2018
    • July 2018
    • June 2018
    • May 2018
    • April 2018
    • March 2018
    • February 2018
    • January 2018
    • December 2017
    • November 2017
    • October 2017
    • September 2017
    • August 2017
    • July 2017
    • June 2017
    • May 2017
    • April 2017
    • March 2017
    • February 2017
    • January 2017
    • December 2016
    • November 2016
    • October 2016
    • September 2016
    • August 2016
    • July 2016
    • June 2016
    • May 2016
    • April 2016
    • March 2016
    • February 2016
    • December 2015
    • November 2015
    • July 2015
    • June 2015
    • May 2015
    • April 2015
    • March 2015
    • February 2015
    • January 2015
    • December 2014
    • November 2014
    • October 2014
    • September 2014
    • July 2014
    • May 2014
    • February 2014
    Categories
    • Archives
    • Blog
    • CanLitCrit Essay Contest
    • CNQ Abroad
    • CNQ Timeline
    • Essays
    • Exhumations
    • Features
    • First Reading
    • Interviews
    • Poetry
    • Profiles in Bookselling
    • Rereading
    • Reviews
    • Short Fiction
    • The Antiquarium
    • The Dusty Bookcase
    • The North Wing
    • Uncategorized
    • Used and Rare
    • Web Exclusive
    Meta
    • Log in
    • Entries feed
    • Comments feed
    • WordPress.org
    CNQ: Canadian Notes and Queries
    1686 Ottawa St.
    Windsor, ON
    N8Y 1R1
    Phone: 519-915-3930
    Email: info [at] notesandqueries [dot] ca
    Instagram: @cnandq

    Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.