"You Will Weep and Know Why"

Perhaps channeling his inner Lucy Van Pelt?

And, yes, the end was not what was expected after such a buildup.

 

I gave it a chance even after reading some of the comments largely because I'm from Mississippi and am familiar with the schools and coaches mentioned, and because I've liked what I've read from Browning in the past (his story about hunting alligators was outstanding, I thought).

http://www.sbnation.com/longform/2014/1/15/5309064/alligator-hunting-mississippi-profile

But I agree that this one didn't really go anywhere. It was "here's a game that stood out to me at a transitional period in my life."

When even the people involved don't seem to care all that much looking back, I'm not sure why we should either.

 

Why does there always have to be a "why?"
Read it or don't read it. Like it or don't like it. But quit pretending someone robbed you of 20 minutes of your life. Your life or my life isn't that important. We've wasted 20 minutes for a helluva lot worse reasons than reading a decently-written story that has no apparent reason to exist.

 

Like Will Rogers used to say about jokes in which the setup was much stronger than the punchline, "That porch was too big for the house."

 

Nothing personal against the writer, but my take was "You will yawn and know why." There are a few well-turned phrases and nice word pictures in this, but it seems to be long form for the sake of being long form. The focus comes and goes and as some mentioned, it doesn't seem to even deliver a pay-off for all the description and narrative. While there appears to be nice descriptions of moments in time and there are a few parts of the piece where it is evident there was research to show something beyond the run-of-the-mill night he describes, it seems like stream of conscious writing and that didn't work for me. Nor did the personal anecdotes.

 

If you could point out precisely where I even remotely intimated that 20 minutes of my life were stolen, that'd be great. I'm not saying I didn't enjoy the story, but then I can at least relate to it, having been a twentysomething prep reporter. Most of a general audience, however, I don't think really would.

And I'm really not sure how the opinion I expressed led to the statement that "my life or your life isn't that important."

As far as why there has to be a why, well, maybe there doesn't. But looking at it more broadly, pieces like this run the risk, I think, of turning off readers. I think it's easy to see how someone could get to the end of this and think, well, that was all right ... but I'm not sure I'd read the next long-form piece that shows up there.

 

It's a well-meaning, ambitious failure. And I say that as someone who has worked in that broad category more times than I care to admit.

First of all, it's terribly unfocused. There are more people who stroll into and out of the piece than in a season of "The Wire." I would have liked to have gotten to know one or two of them. The kid who almost died. The daughter with cancer. Even the author. People complain when in a piece like this the writer inserts himself too much into the story. Here, he may have needed to do it more. I ultimately don't connect enough with him, which makes it tough to connect with the piece. He quit high school football. OK, why? That would have been a start for me.

Way too much play by play. I've made that mistake, too. Way, way too much time spent on the intricacies of various high school offenses. I like Xs and Os. This was not the place for them, though. Not to that degree.

A couple parting thoughts:

First, he is straining way too hard to make this a tear-jerker. I mean, the title of the piece is, "You Will Weep and You Will Know Why." I think you have to tell a compelling story in an understated way to pull that off. This is a non-compelling story told in an overstated way.

Second, people have said there's no payoff. They are right. No one dies. No one's life is changed in some manner that hooks the reader. I guess he thought that was the point - life goes on. But that doesn't make for great storytelling. Something needs to happen. Anything. Nothing does.

What was the title of the book by another Mississippi writer? Something about a lot of sound and fury, signifying nothing? This was probably a story that was much more effective in his head than on paper. It very desperately needed a good editor.

 

It really reads like he set out with this great idea, was gonna go down to Mississippi and come back with this great story, but when he actually did it, it turned out to be ... not much. And it reads like he said, well, I've put all that time and effort into it, so I have to write something.

 

Actually, Browning still lives in Mississippi, so it was more like several day trips I guess.

But yeah, he needs to realize what every young writer --- really, every young person --- has to learn eventually: events and experiences that had a profound effect on you won't necessarily resonate with anyone else.

 

Well the story resonated with me although I never quite HS football.
The random stream of consciousness and large number of characters
reminded me a bit of Don Delillo's Underworld.

 

I love the poem this title comes from. Gerard Manley Hopkins:

http://allpoetry.com/Spring-&-Fall:-[Margaret,-Are-You-Grieving]

 

turkey sandwich with bacon and a peppercorn ranch remoulade.